SQUIRE and the evolving science of healthcare improvement

Stevens, David P.

doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004158

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the same time, we recognize that simply publishing SQUIRE 2.0 will not effect this change; additional efforts and resources are required. For example, we have created an explanation and elaboration (E&E) document (Goodman D, Ogrinc G, unpublished data;2015) to accompany this article. For each item in SQUIRE 2.0, the E&E provides one or more examples from the published literature and a commentary on how the example(s) meets or does not meet the item's standards; this information brings the content of each item to life.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A recent independent study and editorial also documented and addressed some of these challenges. 20,21 In the second phase, we convened an international advisory group of 18 experts that included editors, authors, researchers, and improvement professionals (see the online Appendix, available at http://ajmq.sagepub.com/supplemental). This group met through 3 conference calls, reviewed SQUIRE 1.0 and the results of the end user evaluation, and provided detailed feedback on successive revisions.…”

Section: Squire 20 Developmental Pathmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

SQUIRE 2.0—Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence—Revised Publication Guidelines from a Detailed Consensus Process

Ogrinc

Davies

Goodman

et al. 2016

Journal of the American College of Surgeons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

*This paper is co-published in BMJ Quality and Safety. Our goal in publishing the SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines concurrently with BMJ and other journals is to ensure that this important information is disseminated to a wider audience. Minor differences exist between this version and the others to be consistent with AJMQ editorial style. AbstractIn the past several years, the science of health care improvement has advanced considerably. In this article, we describe the development of SQUIRE 2.0 and its key components. We undertook the revision between 2012 and 2015 using (1) interviews and focus groups to evaluate SQUIRE 1.0 plus feedback from an international steering group, (2) faceto-face consensus meetings to develop interim drafts, and (3) pilot testing with authors and a public comment period. SQUIRE 2.0 emphasizes 3 key components of systematic efforts to improve the quality, value, and safety of health care: 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 health care, recognizing that they can be complex and multidimensional. It provides common ground to share these discoveries in the scholarly literature (www.squire-statement.org).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Squire 20 Developmental Pathmentioning

confidence: 99%

SQUIRE 2.0—Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence—Revised Publication Guidelines from a Detailed Consensus Process

Ogrinc

Davies

Goodman

et al. 2016

Journal of the American College of Surgeons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent independent study and editorial also documented and addressed some of these challenges. 20,21 In the second phase, we convened an international advisory group of 18 experts that included editors, authors, researchers, and improvement professionals. This group met through 3 conference calls, reviewed SQUIRE 1.0 and the results of the end-user evaluation, and provided detailed feedback on successive revisions.…”

Section: Squire 20 Developmental Pathmentioning

confidence: 99%

Squire 2.0 (Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence): Revised Publication Guidelines From a Detailed Consensus Process

Ogrinc

Davies

Goodman

et al. 2015

American Journal of Critical Care

393

359

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 emphasizes the reporting of 3 key components of systematic efforts to improve the quality, value, and safety of health care: 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 health care, recognizing that they can be complex and multidimensional. It provides common ground to share these discoveries in the scholarly literature (www.squire-statement.org).

show abstract

“…This issue was especially apparent in efforts to write about the cyclic, iterative process that often occurs with improvement interventions. SQUIRE 1.0 was seen by many as unnecessarily complex with too much redundancy and lacking a clear distinction between “doing improvement” and “studying the improvement.” A recent independent study and editorial also documented and addressed some of these challenges 20,21…”

Section: Squire 20 Developmental Pathmentioning

confidence: 99%