5.1 EQUATOR and Design-Specific Reporting Guidelines

EQUATOR and Design-Specific Reporting Guidelines

The EQUATOR Network is an international initiative that promotes transparent and accurate health-research reporting and maintains a searchable library of reporting guidelines. It helps authors find the right guidance; it is not a regulator, ethics committee, journal, or quality-certification body.

Reporting is not conduct

A reporting guideline asks authors to disclose information readers need to understand what was planned, done, found, and interpreted. A conduct standard or protocol governs how the research is designed and carried out. For example, the current ICH E6(R3) Good Clinical Practice guideline addresses trial design and conduct principles, participant protection, data reliability, and quality by design. CONSORT addresses reporting of a randomized trial.

The two can reinforce each other, but they are not interchangeable. A transparent report can reveal flawed conduct; it does not make the conduct acceptable. Conversely, a well-conducted trial can be poorly reported.

Select by design and report type

Begin with the research question and methods, not the preferred acronym.

Some work needs more than one source. An observational diagnostic study may need STARD for diagnostic accuracy and STROBE for its observational features. A network meta-analysis uses PRISMA 2020 plus the network meta-analysis extension. Use the extension that matches the work and verify whether it has been superseded.

Do not say CONSORT applies to every interventional report: a protocol uses SPIRIT, and nonrandomized interventions have other guidance. Do not say STROBE is a methodological recipe; it reports cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional work.

Use guidelines early

Waiting until submission can expose missing information that can no longer be reconstructed. During planning, map guideline items to the protocol, analysis plan, data collection, and intended outputs. During drafting, maintain an item-location table. During quality control, confirm that each listed location actually contains the requested information.

The guideline does not authorize writers to invent a randomization method, sample-size calculation, outcome hierarchy, registration, or ethics approval. If information is missing, ask the responsible investigator and report the limitation or omission truthfully.

Current versions matter

Dated versions can change item structure and emphasis. Current core examples include CONSORT 2025 and SPIRIT 2025, which supersede their 2010 and 2013 core statements respectively; PRISMA 2020; ARRIVE 2.0; CHEERS 2022; and STARD 2015. Confirm current extensions and venue transition rules because journals may update their requirements on different schedules.

A manuscript may cite both the current guideline and an extension. It should not claim “compliance” merely because the references section contains the guideline.

Journal checklists

A journal may require a completed checklist, flow diagram, protocol, statistical plan, or other file. Follow its instructions exactly. If the journal requests manuscript page and line numbers, do not write “reported” without a location. If an item is not applicable, explain why rather than leaving it blank.

Checklist upload rules vary. Failure to submit a required file can delay review or trigger return, but there is no universal rule that every journal automatically rejects any missing checklist. A checklist also does not prevent peer reviewers from requesting clearer reporting.

What a checklist cannot establish

Checklist completion does not prove that:

• allocation was truly concealed;
• a reported analysis was prespecified;
• data are accurate or complete;
• consent and ethics review were valid;
• bias has been eliminated;
• the conclusions follow from the design;
• the study is reproducible.

Those judgments require source evidence, methods, data, governance, and critical appraisal. Report guideline use honestly: “reported in accordance with” may be more defensible than an absolute claim of full compliance when exceptions exist.

Practical workflow

1. Identify the exact design and output.
2. Search EQUATOR and the guideline’s official site for the current core statement and extensions.
3. Check the target journal’s required version and files.
4. Map items to protocol and source evidence.
5. Assign gaps to investigators, statisticians, authors, or other owners.
6. Update the manuscript and checklist together.
7. Recheck after peer-review revisions.
8. Preserve the final checklist and source mapping.