Publication guidelines for quality improvement in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE project
Open accessAbstract
In 2005, draft guidelines were published for reporting studies of quality improvement interventions as the initial step in a consensus process for development of a more definitive version. This article contains the full revised version of the guidelines, which the authors refer to as SQUIRE (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence). This paper also describes the consensus process, which included informal feedback from authors, editors and peer reviewers who used the guidelines; formal written commentaries; input from a group of publication guideline developers; ongoing review of the literature on the epistemology of improvement and methods for evaluating complex social programmes; a two-day meeting of stakeholders for critical discussion and debate of the guidelines' content and wording; and commentary on sequential versions of the guidelines from an expert consultant group. Finally, the authors consider the major differences between SQUIRE and the initial draft guidelines; limitations of and unresolved questions about SQUIRE; ancillary supporting documents and alternative versions that are under development; and plans for dissemination, testing and further development of SQUIRE.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The SQUIRE guidelines suggest that authors provide a description of the intervention and its component parts in sufficient detail to reproduce it, an indication of the main factors that contributed to the choice of the intervention, and initial plans for how the intervention was to be implemented, including specific steps and roles.
“The Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE) suggest that authors provide, among other things, a description of the intervention (in this case implementation strategy) and its component parts in sufficient detail so that others could reproduce it, an indication of the main factors that contributed to the choice of the intervention, and initial plans for how the intervention”
From Implementation strategies: recommendations for specifying and reporting (2013) · cites this paper as [93]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
(1983) · Cited by 33,192 · see citing works
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., Vandenbroucke, J. P., & Initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040296 · Cited by 23,020 · see citing works
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., Vandenbroucke, J. P., & Initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010 · Cited by 17,796 · see citing works
(2002) · Cited by 13,211 · see citing works
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., Egger, M., & Initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297 · Cited by 8,613 · see citing works
The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration
Altman, D. G., Schulz, K. F., Moher, D., Egger, M., Davidoff, F., Elbourne, D., Gøtzsche, P. C., Lang, T., & for the CONSORT Group (2001) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00012 · Cited by 3,835 · see citing works
Self-citationVandenbroucke, J. P., Elm, E. V., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., Egger, M., & initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010-w1 · Cited by 3,543 · see citing works
Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions
Pawson, R., Greenhalgh, T., Harvey, G., & Walshe, K. (2005) · Journal of Health Services Research & Policy · doi:10.1258/1355819054308530 · Cited by 3,190 · see citing works
The STARD Statement for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: Explanation and Elaboration
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P., Irwig, L., Moher, D., Rennie, D., de Vet, H. C. W., & Lijmer, J. G. (2003) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/49.1.7 · Cited by 1,124 · see citing works
The STARD Statement for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: Explanation and Elaboration
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Moher, D., Rennie, D., de Vet, H. C. W., & Lijmer, J. G. (2003) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-1-200301070-00012-w1 · Cited by 1,124 · see citing works
Plint, A. C., Moher, D., Morrison, A., Schulz, K., Altman, D. G., Hill, C., & Gaboury, I. (2006) · Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00557.x · Cited by 872 · see citing works
Enhancing the quality and transparency of health research
Groves, T. (2008) · British medical journal · doi:10.1136/bmj.a718 · Cited by 727 · see citing works
Jadad, A. R., & Enkin, M. W. (2007) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470691922 · Cited by 461 · see citing works
Ogrinc, G. S., Mooney, S. E., Estrada, C. A., Foster, T. C., Goldmann, D. A., Hall, L. W., Huizinga, M. M., Liu, S. K., Mills, P. D., Neily, J. B., et al. (2008) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2008.029058 · Cited by 443 · see citing works
Self-citationEvaluation for the 21st Century: A Handbook
Chelimsky, E., & Shadish, W. R. (1997) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781483348896 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
Value of Flow Diagrams in Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials
Egger, M. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.15.1996 · Cited by 317 · see citing works
Davidoff, F. (2005) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.014787 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
Self-citationGandhi, A. G., Murphy-Graham, E. E., Petrosino, A. J., Chrismer, S. S., & Weiss, C. H. (2007) · Evaluation Review · doi:10.1177/0193841x06287188 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
Broadening the view of evidence-based medicine
Berwick, D. M. (2005) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.015669 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Randomized Controlled Trials: Questions, Answers and Musings
Jadad, A. R., & Enkin, M. W. (2007) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 144 · see citing works
Bechtold, M. L., Scott, S. D., Dellsperger, K. C., et al. (2007) · Postgraduate Medical Journal · doi:10.1136/qshc.2006.021139 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
The checklist: if something so simple can transform intensive care, what else can it do?
Gawande, A. A. (2007) · PubMed · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Williams, J. W. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520370057037 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Batalden, P. B., & Davidoff, F. (2007) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.298.9.1059 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Self-citationReporting Randomized Controlled Trials: An Experiment and a Call for Responses From Readers
Rennie, D. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520370096044 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Randomized Controlled Trials: Questions, Answers, and Musings
Lumley, J. (2008) · Birth · doi:10.1111/j.1523-536x.2008.00251_1.x · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Stockman, J. A. (2008) · Yearbook of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/s0084-3954(08)70506-2 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
From Waste to Value in Health Care
Boat, T. F. (2008) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.299.5.568 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Chin, M. H. (2006) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2006.017749 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Strengthening the contribution of quality improvement research to evidence based health care
Baker, G. R. (2006) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.017103 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Reporting Randomized, Controlled Trials
Ko, C. Y., Sack, J. L., Chang, J. T., & Fink, A. (2002) · Diseases of the Colon & Rectum · doi:10.1007/s10350-004-6217-x · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Pronovost, P. J. (2006) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2006.018432 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence
Mason, D. J. (2008) · AJN American Journal of Nursing · doi:10.1097/01.naj.0000339168.31142.d1 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Consensus publication guidelines: the next step in the science of quality improvement?
Thomson, R. G. (2005) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.015727 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Why new guidelines for reporting improvement research? And why now?
Stevens, D. (2005) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2005.016311 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Self-citationShojania, K. G., Ranji, S. R., McDonald, K. M., Grimshaw, J. M., Sundaram, V., Rushakoff, R. J., & Owens, D. K. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.296.4.427 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Reporting randomized controlled trials. An experiment and a call for responses from readers
Rennie, D. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.273.13.1054 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
A proposal: publication guidelines for healthcare improvement education reports
Stevens, D. P., & Andersson‐Gäre, B. (2007) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.2007.025189 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Self-citationA Next Step: Reviewer Feedback on Quality Improvement Publication Guidelines
Janisse, T. (2007) · The Permanente Journal · doi:10.7812/tpp/06-152 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- [16]Quality and Safety in Health Care. Guidelines for authors: guidelines for submitting more extensive quality research http://qshc.bmj.com/ifora/article_type.dtl#extensive (accessed 1 July 2008)
- [20]Day RA The origins of the scientific paper: the IMRaD format. J Am Med Writers Assoc 1989; 4: 16– 18
- [25]Pawson R Tilley N Realistic evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1997
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Powell, B. J., Waltz, T. J., Chinman, M. J., Damschroder, L. J., Smith, J. L., Matthieu, M. M., Proctor, E. K., & Kirchner, J. E. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1 · Cited by 4,963 · see citing works
Ogrinc, G., Davies, L., Goodman, D., Batalden, P., Davidoff, F., & Stevens, D. (2016) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004411 · Cited by 2,996 · see citing works
Self-citationImplementation strategies: recommendations for specifying and reporting
Proctor, E. K., Powell, B. J., & McMillen, J. C. (2013) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-139 · Cited by 2,585 · see citing works
Taylor, M. J., McNicholas, C., Nicolay, C., Darzi, A., Bell, D., & Reed, J. E. (2014) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2013-001862 · Cited by 1,871 · see citing works
Peters, D. H., Adam, T., Alonge, O., Agyepong, I. A., & Tran, N. (2014) · British Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1136/bmj.f6753 · Cited by 1,109 · see citing works
A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research
Simera, I., Moher, D., Hoey, J., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2010) · European Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2362.2009.02234.x · Cited by 1,047 · see citing works
Methods to Improve the Selection and Tailoring of Implementation Strategies
Powell, B. J., Beidas, R. S., Lewis, C. C., Aarons, G. A., McMillen, J. C., Proctor, E. K., & Mandell, D. S. (2017) · The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research · doi:10.1007/s11414-015-9475-6 · Cited by 967 · see citing works
Specifying and reporting complex behaviour change interventions: the need for a scientific method
Michie, S., Fixsen, D., Grimshaw, J. M., & Eccles, M. P. (2009) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-40 · Cited by 976 · see citing works
Viswanathan, M., Golin, C. E., Jones, C. D., Ashok, M., Blalock, S. J., Wines, R. C. M., Coker-Schwimmer, E. J. L., Rosen, D. L., Sista, P., & Lohr, K. N. (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-11-201212040-00538 · Cited by 754 · see citing works
Ogrinc, G., Armstrong, G. E., Dolansky, M. A., Singh, M. K., & Davies, L. (2019) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000002750 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Self-citationThe influence of contextual factors on healthcare quality improvement initiatives: a realist review
Coles, E., Anderson, J., Maxwell, M., Harris, F. M., Gray, N. M., Milner, G., & MacGillivray, S. (2020) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-020-01344-3 · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Are Peer Reviewers Encouraged to Use Reporting Guidelines? A Survey of 116 Health Research Journals
Hirst, A., & Altman, D. G. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035621 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Writing implementation research grant proposals: ten key ingredients
Proctor, E. K., Powell, B. J., Baumann, A. A., Hamilton, A. M., & Santens, R. L. (2012) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-7-96 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Pinnock, H., Epiphaniou, E., Sheikh, A., Griffiths, C., Eldridge, S., Craig, P., & Taylor, S. J. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0235-z · Cited by 128 · see citing works
Rokstad, A. M. M., Vatne, S., Engedal, K., & Selbæk, G. (2015) · Journal of Nursing Management · doi:10.1111/jonm.12072 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Fuller, T., Pearson, M., Peters, J., & Anderson, R. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0121585 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Van Hoof, T. J., Miller, N. E., & Meehan, T. P. (2013) · American Journal of Medical Quality · doi:10.1177/1062860613476335 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Davidoff, F., Batalden, P., Stevens, D., Ogrinc, G., Mooney, S., & for the SQUIRE development group
- Affiliations
- Institute for Healthcare Improvement (US)
- Dartmouth College (US)
- Corresponding author
- Davidoff, F
- Venue
- Quality and Safety in Health Care
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2008-10-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- Suppl 1
- Pages
- i3-i9
- ISSN
- 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-3901
- PMC
- PMC2773518
- OpenAlex
- W2157975848
- Cited by
- 324
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 40.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- BMJ Quality & Safety (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (58073)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
- Keywords
- squire, quality improvement intervention, reporting guidelines, consensus building, healthcare quality improvement, stakeholder engagement, guideline development
- MeSH terms
- Publishing, Quality of Health Care, Guidelines as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
