reporting-guidelines

name	reporting-guidelines
description	Use when finalizing a draft or running /submit-check. Selects the matching reporting guideline (CONSORT for RCTs, STROBE for observational, PRISMA-ScR for scoping reviews, CARE for case reports, COREQ/SRQR for qualitative) and runs its checklist. Each guideline maps items to manuscript locations for verification.

Reporting Guidelines: Compliance Checklist

Research integrity depends on transparent, complete reporting. This skill matches your study design to the appropriate reporting standard and verifies checklist compliance.

---

Step 1: Identify Your Study Type

Maintenance note: this flowchart mirrors paper-types/SKILL.md's "Quick Decision Tree" (same primary-data/design/scope questions, different purpose — guideline/checklist selection here vs. reference/rubric file selection there). Keep both in sync when either changes.

Use this flowchart to find your guideline:

Did you collect PRIMARY DATA (your own study)?
  
  YES (You did original research)
  │
  ├─ Randomized treatment assignment → RCT (CONSORT 2010)
  │
  ├─ No randomization:
  │  │
  │  ├─ Cohort / case-control / cross-sectional → OBSERVATIONAL (STROBE)
  │  │
  │  ├─ Single case with detailed timeline → CASE REPORT (CARE)
  │  │
  │  └─ Interviews / focus groups / ethnography → QUALITATIVE (COREQ or SRQR)
  │
  NO (You reviewed literature)
  │
  ├─ Mapping the field (breadth, what exists?) → SCOPING REVIEW (PRISMA-ScR)
  │
  ├─ Systematic search + synthesis → SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (PRISMA 2020)
  │
  └─ Narrative synthesis (selective scope) → No specific guideline required

---

Step 2: Load Your Guideline

Click the matching reference file below:

Study Type	Guideline	Reference File	Key Points
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT)	CONSORT 2010	reference/consort.md	25 items; flow diagram; randomization transparency
Observational (Cohort/Case-Control/Cross-sectional)	STROBE	reference/strobe.md	22 items; design-specific variants; confounder specification
Scoping Review	PRISMA-ScR	reference/prisma-scr.md	22 items; mapping table; breadth over depth
Case Report	CARE	reference/care.md	13 items; timeline; consent statement
Qualitative (Interviews/Focus Groups)	COREQ	reference/coreq.md	32 items; theme-quote-source chain; saturation
Qualitative (Broader: Ethnography, Observation, etc.)	SRQR	reference/srqr.md	21 items; researcher reflexivity; trustworthiness

---

Step 3: Run the Checklist

Each reference file provides:

1. The full checklist (items + definitions).
2. A location map (where each item appears in your manuscript).
3. Common pitfalls (what reviewers look for).

Quick Check (5 Minutes)

Before detailed review, quickly verify:

• Does the checklist exist and match my study type?
• Have I addressed the "critical" items (flow diagram, consent, saturation, etc.)?
• Are there any items I haven't mentioned? (Mark them for revision.)

Detailed Check (30 Minutes)

• Open your draft.
• For each checklist item, find where it's addressed (or note if missing).
• Mark ALL items as PASS, NEEDS REVISION, or MISSING.
• Plan revisions for MISSING/NEEDS REVISION items.

---

Step 4: Use /submit-check to Auto-Run

The /submit-check command:

1. Reads your draft.
2. Detects study type.
3. Loads the matching checklist.
4. Reports compliance (PASS / NEEDS REVISION / MISSING).
5. Suggests fixes.

Usage:

/submit-check

---

Mapping Checklist Items to Manuscript Sections

Each guideline reference file maps items to sections. Example from CONSORT:

Item #	Item	Appears In
1	Title identifies as "randomized controlled trial"	Title
2a	Structured abstract with all key elements	Abstract
3a	Description of study design	Introduction + Methods
4a	Scientific background and rationale	Introduction
5	Specific objectives and hypotheses	Introduction (end)
6a	Description of trial design, including allocation ratio	Methods
6b	Important changes to methods after trial commencement	Methods or Appendix
7a	How sample size was determined	Methods
7b	When interim analyses were planned	Methods
...	(24 more items)	...

Your task: Verify every item has a "Appears In" location in your draft.

---

Common Pitfalls by Guideline

CONSORT (RCTs)

• Missing flow diagram → Include: enrolled, allocated, followed up, analyzed (with exclusion counts at each stage).
• Unclear randomization → Specify: method (random.org, sealed envelope), allocation concealment, who assigned.
• No baseline characteristics table → Add Table 1: Demographics, baseline outcome measures by group.

STROBE (Observational)

• Design not clearly labeled → State explicitly: "This is a prospective cohort study" (not just "We followed patients").
• Confounders not specified → List confounders you measured and how you addressed them (matching, regression, etc.).
• Missing flow diagram → Show participant numbers at each stage (recruitment, inclusion/exclusion, analysis).

CARE (Case Reports)

• No informed consent → Must include: "Written informed consent was obtained on [date]" or explanation of why not obtainable.
• Timeline vague → Use dates or "Day 1, Day 2…"; table format helps.
• De-identification unclear → Specify what was removed/masked (name, MRN, specific location) while retaining clinically relevant detail.

COREQ (Qualitative - Interviews/FG)

• Quotes missing page numbers → Every quote must have source ID + page/timestamp.
• Saturation not discussed → State when/why data collection stopped.
• Analysis process opaque → Describe: coding approach (deductive/inductive), multi-coder agreement, tool used (NVivo, etc.).

SRQR (Qualitative - Broader)

• Researcher positionality missing → State researchers' background, credentials, potential biases.
• Trustworthiness strategies not mentioned → Describe: member checking, peer debriefing, triangulation, negative case analysis.
• Findings presented without context → Use thick description; show how findings emerged from data.

PRISMA-ScR (Scoping Review)

• Search strategy not fully documented → Include exact queries per database, hits per database, dates searched.
• Mapping table missing → Show studies × key dimensions (design, population, findings, themes).
• Scope not justified → Explain why this breadth (what gap does it fill?).

---

Checklist Compliance Decision Tree

For each item:

Is this item addressed in your draft?
  
  YES → Is it fully explained and defensible?
    YES → PASS ✓
    NO  → NEEDS REVISION (elaborate, clarify)
  
  NO → Can it be omitted (marked "not applicable") with justification?
    YES → PASS (with justification note)
    NO  → MISSING (must be added)

---

Revision Strategy

Priority 1 (Critical Items — Must Fix)

These items are fundamental to study credibility:

• CONSORT: Flow diagram, randomization description, allocation concealment.
• STROBE: Study design clearly stated, confounders specified, flow diagram.
• CARE: Informed consent, timeline, de-identification.
• COREQ/SRQR: Quote-source chain (page numbers), saturation, reflexivity.
• PRISMA-ScR: Search strategy fully documented, mapping table.

Priority 2 (Important — Should Fix)

These strengthen the paper but missing them won't block publication (though reviewers will request revision):

• CONSORT: Baseline characteristics table, dropout reasons, adverse events.
• STROBE: Loss-to-follow-up description, bias discussion.
• CARE: Limitations section, positioning vs literature.
• COREQ/SRQR: Member checking, peer debriefing.
• PRISMA-ScR: Risk-of-bias assessment (if applicable), GRADE certainty.

Priority 3 (Nice-to-Have — Can Address in Revision)

• Extended discussion of limitations.
• Supplementary material (codebook, full search strategy in appendix).
• Post-hoc subgroup analyses.

---

Using This Skill + /submit-check Together

Scenario	Action
You've drafted Methods and want to spot-check compliance	Read the relevant checklist reference file (e.g., reference/consort.md)
You're ready to finalize and want a systematic audit	Run /submit-check; it auto-runs the full checklist
Reviewers requested items you didn't include	Cross-reference the reviewer comment with the checklist; see where it should appear
You're uncertain if an item "counts"	Read that item's explanation in the reference file; it clarifies what counts as sufficient

---

Quick Reference: Checklist Items by Category

All Guidelines Include These Themes

Theme	Example Item
Title clarity	Is the study type evident from title?
Abstract completeness	Does abstract summarize objectives, methods, results, conclusions?
Objective/RQ clarity	Is the research question stated explicitly?
Methods transparency	Can readers replicate the study?
Ethical compliance	Is informed consent/ethics approval documented?
Results presentation	Are findings presented completely (not selectively)?
Limitations honesty	Are limitations acknowledged?
Implications	What does this study mean for practice/theory?

---

Reporting Guideline Selection Matrix

Design	Primary Guideline	Secondary Refs (if hybrid)
RCT	CONSORT	—
Cohort	STROBE	(Observational variant)
Case-control	STROBE	(Observational variant)
Cross-sectional	STROBE	(Observational variant)
Single case	CARE	—
Qualitative interviews	COREQ	(or SRQR if ethnography combined)
Qualitative + observation	SRQR	(or COREQ if primarily interviews)
Scoping review	PRISMA-ScR	—
Systematic review	PRISMA 2020	(See literature-review skill)

---

Next Steps

1. Identify your study type (use flowchart above).
2. Open the matching reference file (consort.md, strobe.md, etc.).
3. Run the detailed checklist against your draft.
4. Mark items: PASS / NEEDS REVISION / MISSING.
5. Prioritize revisions (Critical items first).
6. Use /submit-check for final automated verification.

---

References

Each reference file below contains the official checklist plus guidance:

• reference/consort.md — CONSORT 2010 (RCTs)
• reference/strobe.md — STROBE (Observational)
• reference/prisma-scr.md — PRISMA-ScR (Scoping Reviews)
• reference/care.md — CARE (Case Reports)
• reference/coreq.md — COREQ (Qualitative Interviews/FG)
• reference/srqr.md — SRQR (Qualitative Broader)

Official sources:

• CONSORT: consort-statement.org
• STROBE: strobe-statement.org
• PRISMA-ScR: prisma-statement.org
• CARE: care-statement.org
• COREQ: equator-network.org
• SRQR: equator-network.org