Frequently Asked Questions
How to cite SQUIRE
In your methods section, state which guideline resources you used to write your article, refer readers to the supplementary materials to view your completed checklist, and cite this reporting guideline. For example:
We used the SQUIRE writing guide when drafting this article, and the SQUIRE checklist (see supplementary materials A) to demonstrate adherence to the SQUIRE reporting guideline. [1].
You can use your reference manager to save citation information for this webpage, or copy the BibTeX below.
Who made SQUIRE?
Greg Ogrinc, Louise Davies, Daisy Goodman, Paul Batalden, Frank Davidoff, David Stevens
See the SQUIRE development article for details on its authors.
How was SQUIRE made?
See the SQUIRE development article for details on how this guideline was originally developed.
The UK EQUATOR Centre then worked with SQUIRE’s authors to make SQUIRE easier to use by clarifying language, adding definitions, examples, extra information and resources. Although worded differently, the guidance on this website is conceptually the same as the original publication and can be used interchangeably.
Does SQUIRE prescribe structure?
No. SQUIRE does not prescribe a rigid format or standardized content. Consider each item and prioritize elements that are most relevant to your study, findings, context, and readers.
You may prefer to report an item in a different order, section, or in a table or figure. For example, some authors may prefer to include some methods items in their Results section. Others may call their Results section Findings, or have a completely different manuscript structure.
How to prioritize items and keep writing concise
Although all items should be reported, you should prioritize items most relevant to your study, findings, context, and readership.
You should include information in the article body when possible so it’s easy for readers to find. However, if you are worried about word counts or brevity, consider placing information in tables.
If you feel confident that an item is less important to your study, you could report it in an appendix or supplement. Be aware that supplementary materials may not be peer reviewed, are not indexed by search engines, and can be difficult for readers to find. Therefore, they are best only used for details you feel are less important, and you should point readers to them from the article body. For example, “For more details, see the supplementary materials A”.
The UK EQUATOR centre runs training on how to write concisely.
What to write if you feel an item is not applicable
If you think an item is not applicable, state why. You could state this in the text or in the reporting checklist. Remember to publish your completed reporting checklist as a supplement, and to refer authors to it from your methods section.
What to do if asked to remove guideline related content
If a colleague or reviewer asks you to remove content that is related to this guideline, you can direct them to this guideline and the explanation for why that item is important. If they insist, consider moving the item to a supplement, table or figure.
Where can I get general writing training?
The EQUATOR Network provides in-person training for writing research articles.
AuthorAID have resources, an online course, and mentoring to help authors.
Reuse
Citation
@article{ogrincSQUIREStandardsQUality2016,
author = {Ogrinc, Greg and Davies, Louise and Goodman, Daisy and
Batalden, Paul and Davidoff, Frank and Stevens, David},
publisher = {BMJ Publishing Group Ltd},
title = {SQUIRE 2.0 {(Standards} for {QUality} {Improvement}
{Reporting} {Excellence):} Revised Publication Guidelines from a
Detailed Consensus Process},
journal = {BMJ Quality \& Safety},
volume = {25},
number = {12},
pages = {986-992},
date = {2016-12-01},
urldate = {2020-11-05},
url = {https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/25/12/986},
doi = {10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004411},
langid = {en},
abstract = {Since the publication of Standards for QUality Improvement
Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 1.0) guidelines in 2008, the science of
the field has advanced considerably. In this manuscript, we describe
the development of SQUIRE 2.0 and its key components. We undertook
the revision between 2012 and 2015 using (1) semistructured
interviews and focus groups to evaluate SQUIRE 1.0 plus feedback
from an international steering group, (2) two face-to-face consensus
meetings to develop interim drafts and (3) pilot testing with
authors and a public comment period. SQUIRE 2.0 emphasises 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). SQUIRE 2.0 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
(http://www.squire-statement.org).}
}
