This checklist is relevant to reports that describe system level work to improve the quality, safety, and value of healthcare, and is based on the SQUIRE statement. Read more
Or download and complete offline
Instructions
Complete this checklist by entering the page numbers from your manuscript where readers will find each of the items listed below.
Your article may not currently address all the items on the checklist. Please modify your text to include the missing information. If you are certain that an item does not apply, please write "n/a" and provide a short explanation.
Download your completed checklist and include it as an extra file when you submit to a journal.
1.
Indicate that the manuscript concerns an initiative to improve healthcare (broadly defined to include the quality, safety, effectiveness, patientcenteredness, timeliness, cost, efficiency, and equity of healthcare).
02a
Provide adequate information to aid in searching and indexing.
02b
Summarize all key information from various sections of the text using the abstract format of the intended publication or a structured summary such as: background, local problem, methods, interventions, results, conclusions.
3.
Problem description
Nature and significance of the local problem.
4.
Available knowledge
Summary of what is currently known about the problem, including relevant previous studies.
5.
Rationale
Informal or formal frameworks, models, concepts, and / or theories used to explain the problem, any reasons or assumptions that were used to develop the intervention(s), and reasons why the intervention(s) was expected to work.
6.
Specific aims
Purpose of the project and of this report.
7.
Context
Contextual elements considered important at the outset of introducing the intervention(s).
08a
Intervention(s)
Description of the intervention(s) in sufficient detail that others could reproduce it.
08b
Specifics of the team involved in the work.
09a
Study of the Intervention(s)
Approach chosen for assessing the impact of the intervention(s).
09b
Approach used to establish whether the observed outcomes were due to the intervention(s).
10a
Measures
Measures chosen for studying processes and outcomes of the intervention(s), including rationale for choosing them, their operational definitions, and their validity and reliability.
10b
Description of the approach to the ongoing assessment of contextual elements that contributed to the success, failure, efficiency, and cost.
10c
Methods employed for assessing completeness and accuracy of data.
11a
Analysis
Qualitative and quantitative methods used to draw inferences from the data.
11b
Methods for understanding variation within the data, including the effects of time as a variable.
12.
Ethical considerations
Ethical aspects of implementing and studying the intervention(s) and how they were addressed, including, but not limited to, formal ethics review and potential conflict(s) of interest.
13a
Initial steps of the intervention(s) and their evolution over time (e.g., time-line diagram, flow chart, or table), including modifications made to the intervention during the project.
13b
Details of the process measures and outcome.
13c
Contextual elements that interacted with the intervention(s).
13d
Observed associations between outcomes, interventions, and relevant contextual elements.
13e
Unintended consequences such as unexpected benefits, problems, failures, or costs associated with the intervention(s).
13f
Details about missing data.
14a
Summary
Key findings, including relevance to the rationale and specific aims.
14b
Particular strengths of the project.
15a
Interpretation
Nature of the association between the intervention(s) and the outcomes.
15b
Comparison of results with findings from other publications.
15c
Impact of the project on people and systems.
15d
Reasons for any differences between observed and anticipated outcomes, including the influence of context.
15e
Costs and strategic trade-offs, including opportunity costs.
16a
Limitations
Limits to the generalizability of the work.
16b
Factors that might have limited internal validity such as confounding, bias, or imprecision in the design, methods, measurement, or analysis.
16c
Efforts made to minimize and adjust for limitations.
17a
Conclusion
Usefulness of the work.
17b
Sustainability.
17c
Potential for spread to other contexts.
17d
Implications for practice and for further study in the field.
17e
Suggested next steps.
18.
Funding
Sources of funding that supported this work. Role, if any, of the funding organization in the design, implementation, interpretation, and reporting.
To acknowledge this checklist in your methods, please state "We used the SQUIRE checklist when writing our report [citation]". Then cite this checklist as Ogrinc G, Davies L, Goodman D, Batalden P, Davidoff F, Stevens D. SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process.
The SQUIRE 2.0 checklist is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY-NC 4.0
The SQUIRE 2.0 reporting guidelines focus on the reporting of three key components of systematic efforts to improve the quality, value and safety of healthcare: the use of formal and informal theory in planning, implementing and evaluating improvement work; the context in which the work is done and the study of the intervention(s). The guideline is intended for reporting the range of methods used to improve healthcare, recognising that they can be complex and multidimensional. It provides common ground to share these discoveries in the scholarly literature.