目的 对中文版药物素养评估工具进行系统评价。方法 计算机检索PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、Cochrane Library、Scopus、CINAHL、中国知网、万方、维普数据库、中国生物医学文献服务系统，获取与中文版成人药物素养评估工具相关的研究，检索时限为建库至2024年11月27日。由2名研究者独立筛选文献、提取数据，并基于健康测量工具选择的共识标准（COSMIN）对评估工具的测量属性及相关研究的方法学质量进行评定，依据改良版定量系统评价证据分级方法形成最终推荐意见。结果 共纳入16篇文献，涉及16种中文版成人药物素养评估工具，均未报告评估工具的跨文化效度、测量误差及反应度。因有低质量及以上证据证明5种评估工具的内容效度、内部一致性为“充分”，该5种评估工具为A级推荐工具，其余评估工具均为B级推荐工具。结论 中文版成人药物素养评估工具多样，但质量参差不齐，癌痛患者镇痛药物素养评估量表等5种评估工具可暂时被推荐使用，但其测量属性仍有待进一步验证。

Objective To conduct a systematic evaluation of Chinese version of medication literacy assessment tools.Methods Databases including PubMed，Web of Science，Embase，Cochrane Library，Scopus，CINAHL，CNKI，Wanfang Data，VIP，and SinoMed were searched for studies related to Chinese version of adult medication literacy assessment tools from the establishment of the databases to November 27，2024. Two researchers independently screened the literature，extracted data，and assessed the measurement properties of the assessment tools and the methodological quality of the related studies based on the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments（COSMIN）. Final recommendations were formed according to the modified systematic review evidence grading method.Results A total of 16 articles were included，none of which reported on the cross-cultural validity，measurement error，or responsiveness of the assessment tools. Five assessment tools were recommended as Grade A due to low-quality evidence supporting their content validity and internal consistency as “adequate”，while the remaining assessment tools were recommended as Grade B.Conclusion There is a diversity of Chinese version of adult medication literacy assessment tools，but their quality varies. Five assessment tools，including the Analgesic Medication Literacy Questionnaire for Cancer Pain Patients，can be recommended for temporary use，albeit their measurement properties still require further validation.