Research Methods & Reporting

Publication guidelines for quality improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE project

BMJ 2009; 338 doi: 10.1136/bmj.a3152 (Published 19 January 2009)
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;338:a3152
  1. Frank Davidoff, executive editor1,
  2. Paul Batalden, director2,
  3. David Stevens, director of the quality literature programme 2,
  4. Greg Ogrinc, associate director of the quality literature programme32,
  5. Susan E Mooney, medical director for quality improvement 42
  6. for the SQUIRE development group
  1. 1Institute for Healthcare Improvement, 143 Garden Street, Wethersfield, CT 06109, USA
  2. 2Center for Leadership and Improvement, Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice Lebanon, NH 03766, USA
  3. 3White River Junction VA Hospital, White River Junction, VT 05009-0001, USA
  4. 4Alice Peck Day Memorial Hospital, Lebanon, NH 03766, USA
  1. Correspondence to: F Davidoff fdavidoff{at}cox.net
  • Accepted 20 October 2008

Abstract

In 2005 we published draft guidelines for reporting studies of quality improvement, as the initial step in a consensus process for development of a more definitive version. The current article contains the revised version, which we refer to as standards for quality improvement reporting excellence (SQUIRE). This narrative progress report summarises the special features of improvement that are reflected in SQUIRE, and describes major differences between SQUIRE and the initial draft guidelines. It also briefly describes the guideline development process; considers the limitations of and unresolved questions about SQUIRE; describes ancillary supporting documents and alternative versions under development; and discusses plans for dissemination, testing, and further development of SQUIRE.

Footnotes

  • We thank Rosemary Gibson and Laura Leviton for support of this project; the Institute for Healthcare Improvement for help in hosting the review meeting in Cambridge; and Joy McAvoy for administrative work in coordinating the entire development process.

  • The following people contributed critical input to the guidelines during their development: Kay Dickersin, Donald Goldmann, Peter Goetzsche, Gordon Guyatt, Hal Luft, Kathryn McPherson, Victor Montori, Dale Needham, Duncan Neuhauser, Kaveh Shojania, Vincenza Snow, Ed Wagner, Val Weber. The following participants in the consensus process also provided critical input on the guidelines, and endorsed the final version. Their endorsements are personal and do not imply endorsement by any group, organisation, or agency: David Aron, Virginia Barbour, Jesse Berlin, Steven Berman, Donald Berwick, Maureen Bisognano, Andrew Booth, Isabelle Boutron, Peter Buerhaus, Marshall Chin, Benjamin Crabtree, Linda Cronenwett, Mary Dixon-Woods, Brad Doebbling, Denise Dougherty, Martin Eccles, Susan Ellenberg, William Garrity, Lawrence Green, Trisha Greenhalgh, Linda Headrick, Susan Horn, Julie Johnson, Kate Koplan, David Korn, Uma Kotegal, Seth Landefield, Elizabeth Loder, Joanne Lynn, Susan Mallett, Peter Margolis, Diana Mason, Don Minckler, Brian Mittman, Cynthia Mulrow, Eugene Nelson, Paul Plsek, Peter Pronovost, Lloyd Provost, Philippe Ravaud, Roger Resar, Jane Roessner, John-Arne Røttingen, Lisa Rubenstein, Harold Sox, Ted Speroff, Richard Thomson, Erik von Elm, Elizabeth Wager, Doug Wakefield, Bill Weeks, Hywel Williams, Sankey Williams. All authors contributed substantively to the ideas developed in the SQUIRE project, and provided critical input on the guidelines. All authors reviewed, commented on, and approved the final version of the paper. FD drafted the paper and is the guarantor.

  • Funding: The SQUIRE project was supported in part by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF grant number 58073).

  • Competing interests: None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Rapid responses

THIS WEEK'S POLL

Read related article

See previous polls

BMJ most popular