The SQUIRE reporting checklist

Note

If you have not used a reporting guideline before, read about how and why to use them and check whether SQUIRE is the most applicable reporting guideline for your work.

Reporting guidelines are most useful when used early in research. When writing a manuscript or application, consider using the Full Guidance where you’ll see explanations and examples for each item.

After writing, demonstrate adherence by completing this checklist:

1. Specify where each item is described (see Note 1).
2. Cite this checklist (See Note 2).
3. Include your completed checklist as a supplement when submitting to a journal so that future readers can use it to find information.

	Item Description	Location (or reason for not reporting)
Title and Abstract
1. Title	Indicate that the manuscript concerns an initiative to improve healthcare (broadly defined to include the quality, safety, effectiveness, patient-centredness, timeliness, cost, efficiency and equity of healthcare).
2. Abstract	2a. Provide adequate information to aid in searching and indexing. 2b. Summarise 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.
Introduction
3 & 4. Problem description & Available Knowledge	Nature and significance of the local problem. 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.
Methods
7. Context	Contextual elements considered important at the outset of introducing the intervention(s).
8. Intervention(s)	Description of the intervention(s) in sufficient detail that others could reproduce it Specifics of the team involved in the work.
9. Study of the Intervention(s)	Approach chosen for assessing the impact of the intervention(s) Approach used to establish whether the observed outcomes were due to the intervention(s).
10. 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 Description of the approach to the ongoing assessment of contextual elements that contributed to t…
11. Analysis	Qualitative and quantitative methods used to draw inferences from the data 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.
Results
13 a & b. Evolution of the intervention and details of process measures	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.
13 c, d & e Contextual elements and unexpected consequences	13c. Contextual elements that interacted with the interventions 13d. Observed associations between outcomes, interventions and relevant contextual factors 13e. Unintended consequences such as benefits, harms, unexpected results, problems or failures associated with the intervention(s)
13 e. Missing data	13e. Details about missing data.
Discussion
14. Summary	14a. Key findings, including relevance to the rationale and specific aims 14b. Particular strengths of the project
15. Interpretation	15a. 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
16. Limitations	16a. Limits to the generalisability 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 minimise and adjust for limitations.
17. Conclusion	17a. 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
Other information
18. Funding	Sources of funding that supported this work. Role, if any, of the funding organisation in the design, implementation, interpretation and reporting.

1 How to specify where content is

Tell the reader where they can find information. E.g.,

• Results; paragraph 2
• Methods, Participants; paragraphs 1 & 2.
• Table 3
• Supplement B, para. 4

If you have chosen not to describe an item, explain why. You can do this in the checklist, or as a note below it.

You can describe items in the article body, or in tables, figures, or supplementary materials, and should prioritize items you feel are most important to your intended audience. The order of items in your manuscript does not need to match the order of items in this checklist. You can decide how best to structure your work.

2 How to cite

Describe how you used SQUIRE at the end of your Methods section, referencing the resources you used e.g.,

‘We used the SQUIRE reporting guideline(1) to draft this manuscript, and the SQUIRE reporting checklist(2) when editing, included in supplement A’

If you use a reporting checklist, remember to include it as a supplement when publishing so that readers can easily find information and see how you have interpreted the guidance.

References

1.

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. BMJ Quality & Safety [Internet]. 2016 Dec;25(12):986–92. Available from: https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/25/12/986

2.

Ogrinc G, Davies L, Goodman D, Batalden P, Davidoff F, Stevens D. The SQUIRE reporting checklist. In: Harwood J, Albury C, Beyer J de, Schlüssel M, Collins G, editors. The EQUATOR network reporting guideline platform [Internet]. The UK EQUATOR Centre; 2025. Available from: https:/resources.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/squire/squire-checklist.docx