Twelve instruments satisfied our inclusion criteria for the psychometric review (Figure 1).
This conceptual review included all instruments included in the psychometric review as well as individual body awareness-related items from several instruments.
For lack of a better instrument available today, the conceptual review in conjunction with the psychometric review can aid researchers in selecting currently available measures for particular dimensions of body awareness.
If an instrument that was claimed to measure a construct different from body awareness (i.e. mindfulness) contained items of body awareness-related aspects but did not have a separable subscale, it was excluded from the psychometric review (Table 1).
KIMS and FFMQ contain subscales labeled "Observing"; however, these subscales include items for the awareness of thoughts and external stimuli (sights, sounds, smells) that disqualified them from our psychometric review.
197 measures did not meet the inclusion criteria, leaving seven measures to be included in the psychometric review.
An overall psychometric review of the instruments reveal that QLACS has a high internal consistency reliability, validity, and responsiveness compared to other instruments in BCS.
A psychometric review of the scale [ 25] concludes that: "the internal, interrater, and retest reliability for the overall Hamilton depression scale are mostly good" and "established criteria are met for convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity".
The psychometric properties reviewed included reliability, validity and responsiveness to change.
For the first aim of our study, the psychometric assessment, two reviewers (VG, WM) independently compared the psychometric characteristics of the reviewed measurements until consensus was reached in all categories.
