This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of instruments used to measure individual knowledge management practices (IKMP) in higher education from 2000 to 2024. Given the increasing importance of knowledge management in academic settings, the research focused on evaluating reliability, validity, and interpretability. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines and employing the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) framework to assess psychometric quality. A comprehensive search on Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, SciELO, and Dialnet yielded 2,302 records. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, twenty-seven studies were selected for detailed analysis. Findings showed significant regional disparities, with 58% of studies conducted in Asia and 30% in America. The most frequently reported psychometric properties were internal consistency (85%), structural validity (40%), and reliability (40%). Transparency was limited, as only 59% of studies provided access to the full instruments. Regarding IKMP focus, 44% of studies assessed it as a single factor, reporting high Cronbach’s alpha values and strong correlations with human capital practices. The remaining studies explored IKMP within organizational and individual dimensions. While most studies demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity, none fully addressed all psychometric properties according to COSMIN guidelines. Furthermore, interpretability of the scales was generally limited, underscoring the need for refinement and enhanced transparency in developing instruments to measure IKMP in higher education. These findings highlight critical gaps and provide a basis for improving the assessment of IKMP in academic contexts.