What to write
Sources of funding that supported this work. Role, if any, of the funding organisation in the design, implementation, interpretation and reporting.
Explanation
Sources of funding for quality improvement should be clearly stated at the end of a manuscript in similar fashion to other scholarly reports. Any organisation, institution or agency that contributed financially to any part of the project should be listed. In this example, funding was received from multiple sources including government, university and foundation granting agencies.
Due to their financial interest in the quality improvement project, funding sources have the potential to introduce bias in favour of exaggerated effect size. The role of each funding source should be described in sufficient detail, as in the example below, to allow readers to assess whether these external parties may have influenced the reporting of improvement outcomes. A recent paper by Trautner et al provides a similar approach.1
Example
Funding/Support: This research was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, the Green Shield Canada Foundation, the University of Toronto Department of Medicine, and the Academic Funding Plan Innovation Fund.
Role of the Funder/Sponsor: None of the funder or sponsors had any role in the design of the study, the conduct of the study, the collection, management, analysis or interpretation of the data, or the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.2
Training
The UK EQUATOR Centre runs training on how to write using reporting guidelines.
Discuss this item
Visit this items’ discussion page to ask questions and give feedback.
