Davidoff F, Batalden P, Stevens D, Ogrinc G, Mooney S
Institute for Healthcare Improvement, New Hampshire, USA.
Qual Saf Health Care. 2008 Oct;17 Suppl 1(Suppl_1):i3-9. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2008.029066.
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.
2005年，发布了质量改进干预措施研究报告的指南草案，作为制定更权威版本共识过程的第一步。本文包含该指南的完整修订版，作者将其称为SQUIRE（质量改进报告卓越标准）。本文还描述了共识过程，包括使用该指南的作者、编辑和同行评审者的非正式反馈；正式书面评论；一组出版指南制定者的意见；对改进认识论和评估复杂社会项目方法的文献进行持续审查；为期两天的利益相关者会议，以对指南的内容和措辞进行批判性讨论和辩论；以及专家顾问组对指南各版本顺序的评论。最后，作者考虑了SQUIRE与初始指南草案之间的主要差异；SQUIRE的局限性和未解决的问题；正在开发的辅助支持文件和替代版本；以及SQUIRE的传播、测试和进一步开发计划。
