COREQ Checklist

Scope: COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research.

Reference: See source/archetypes/coreq-2007.yml for canonical link and provenance.

Instructions

• Use the boxes to confirm each reporting item.
• Add reviewer notes under each section as needed.

Domain 1: Research team and reflexivity

• 1. Interviewer/facilitator: Which author/s conducted the interview/focus group?
• 2. Credentials: What were the researcher’s credentials? E.g. PhD, MD.
• 3. Occupation: What was their occupation at the time of the study?
• 4. Gender: Was the researcher male or female?
• 5. Experience and training: What experience or training did the researcher have?
• 6. Relationship established: Was a relationship established prior to study commencement?
• 7. Participant knowledge of the interviewer: What did the participants know about the researcher? e.g. personal goals, reasons for doing the research.
• 8. Interviewer characteristics: What were the interviewer’s characteristics? e.g. assumptions, reasons for doing the research, relationship with participants.

Domain 2: Study design

• 9. Methodological orientation and theory: What is the methodological orientation and what is the theoretical framework for the study?
• 10. Sampling: How were participants selected? e.g. purposive, convenience, consecutive, snowball.
• 11. Method of approach: How were participants approached? e.g. face-to-face, telephone, mail, email.
• 12. Sample size: How many participants were in the study?
• 13. Non-participation: How many people refused to participate or dropped out? Reasons?
• 14. Setting of data collection: Where was the data collected? e.g. home, clinic, workplace.
• 15. Presence of non-participants: Was anyone else present besides the participants and researchers?
• 16. Description of sample: What were the important characteristics of the sample? e.g. demographic data, date.

Domain 3: Analysis and findings

• 17. Data analysis: How many data coders coded the data?
• 18. Derivation of themes: Were themes identified in advance or did they emerge from the data?
• 19. Software: What software, if applicable, was used to manage the data?
• 20. Participant checking: Did participants provide feedback on the findings?
• 21. Major themes: Were major themes clearly presented in the findings?
• 22. Clarity of themes: Is there a description of how themes were developed?
• 23. Quotations presented: Were quotations presented to illustrate the themes?
• 24. Data and findings consistent: Was there consistency between the data presented and the findings?
• 25. Clarity of major themes: Were major themes clearly presented in the findings?
• 26. Clarity of minor themes: Were minor themes clearly presented in the findings?

Notes

Reviewer notes

Provenance

• Source: See sidecar metadata in source/archetypes/coreq-2007.yml
• Version: 2007
• License: All Rights Reserved