Frequency of reporting for each item in the modified SQUIRE 2.0 checklist
| SQUIRE 2.0 item | Frequency | Proportion (95% CI) |
| Background | ||
| Nature and significance of the local problem | 100 | 1.00 (0.96 to 1.00) |
| Summary of what is currently known about the problem, including relevant previous studies | 98 | 0.98 (0.93 to 0.99) |
| 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 | 80 | 0.80 (0.71 to 0.87) |
| Purpose of the project and of this report | 93 | 0.93 (0.86 to 0.97) |
| Methods | ||
| Contextual elements considered important at the outset of introducing the intervention(s) | 92 | 0.92 (0.85 to 0.96) |
| Description of the intervention(s) in sufficient detail that others could reproduce it | 96 | 0.96 (0.90 to 0.98) |
| Specifics of the team involved in the work | 88 | 0.88 (0.80 to 0.93) |
| Approach chosen for assessing the impact of the intervention(s) | 86 | 0.86 (0.78 to 0.91) |
| Measures chosen for studying processes and outcomes of the intervention(s), including rationale for choosing them, their operational definitions, and their validity and reliability (outcome) | 82 | 0.82 (0.73 to 0.88) |
| Measures chosen for studying processes and outcomes of the intervention(s), including rationale for choosing them, their operational definitions, and their validity and reliability (process) | 63 | 0.63 (0.53 to 0.72) |
| Description of the approach to the ongoing assessment of contextual elements that contributed to the success, failure, efficiency, and cost | 49 | 0.49 (0.39 to 0.59) |
| Qualitative and quantitative methods used to draw inferences from the data | 69 | 0.69 (0.59 to 0.77) |
| Methods for understanding variation within the data, including the effects of time as a variable | 48 | 0.48 (0.38 to 0.58) |
| Methods employed for assessing completeness and accuracy of data | 54 | 0.54 (0.44 to 0.63) |
| 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 | 89 | 0.89 (0.81 to 0.94) |
| Results | ||
| Initial steps of the intervention(s) and their evolution over time (eg, time-line diagram, flow chart or table), including modifications made to the intervention during the project | 56 | 0.56 (0.46 to 0.65) |
| Details of the process measures and outcome (outcome) | 97 | 0.97 (0.92 to 0.99) |
| Details of the process measures and outcome (process) | 73 | 0.73 (0.64 to 0.81) |
| Contextual elements that interacted with the intervention(s) | 29 | 0.29 (0.21 to 0.39) |
| Unintended consequences such as unexpected benefits, problems, failures, or costs associated with the intervention(s). | 43 | 0.43 (0.34 to 0.53) |
| Details about missing data | 26 | 0.26 (0.18 to 0.35) |
| Discussion and conclusion | ||
| Key findings, including relevance to the rationale and specific aims | 97 | 0.97 (0.92 to 0.99) |
| Particular strengths of the project | 60 | 0.60 (0.50 to 0.69) |
| Nature of the association between the intervention(s) and the outcomes | 83 | 0.83 (0.74 to 0.89) |
| Comparison of results with findings from other publications | 80 | 0.80 (0.71 to 0.87) |
| Impact of project on people and systems | 50 | 0.50 (0.40 to 0.60) |
| Reasons for any differences between observed and anticipated outcomes, including the influence of context | 59 | 0.59 (0.49 to 0.68) |
| 92 | 0.92 (0.85 to 0.96) |
| Efforts made to minimise and adjust for limitations | 44 | 0.44 (0.35 to 0.54) |
| Usefulness of the work | 71 | 0.71 (0.61 to 0.79) |
| Sustainability | 52 | 0.52 (0.42 to 0.62) |
SQUIRE, Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence.