SRQR vs COREQ vs ENTREQ: Choosing the Right Qualitative Reporting Standard (2026)

Qualitative research reporting standards ensure that study methods are described with enough transparency for readers to assess credibility, transferability, and methodological rigour. Three checklists dominate the field: SRQR, COREQ, and ENTREQ. Each serves a different purpose. Selecting the wrong one — or applying none — is a common cause of desk rejection in qualitative health and social science journals.

This guide explains what each standard covers, when to use it, which journals require which checklist, and how to implement compliance during manuscript preparation.

SRQR, COREQ, and ENTREQ: Comparison at a Glance

How to Choose Between SRQR, COREQ, and ENTREQ

The decision hinges on two variables: what kind of data you collected, and whether your study is primary research or synthesis work.

Use SRQR when your study is a primary qualitative investigation using any method — grounded theory, thematic analysis, phenomenological inquiry, narrative research, ethnography, case study analysis, or content analysis. SRQR was designed to apply broadly across qualitative traditions, making it the appropriate default for studies that do not fall neatly into the COREQ or ENTREQ categories. It is especially common in education, social sciences, psychology, and health professions education, where the 32-item COREQ is considered too narrowly focused on the interview modality.

Use COREQ when your primary data come from in-depth interviews or focus groups, and your research context is health, clinical, or biomedical science. COREQ was developed specifically for these study types through a three-round Delphi process with 22 experts, and it remains the most frequently required guideline for interview-based qualitative research in medical and nursing journals. Its three-domain structure — research team and reflexivity; study design; data collection and analysis — maps directly onto the methods sections that peer reviewers in health journals expect to see.

Use ENTREQ when you are not conducting original data collection but synthesising qualitative findings from multiple existing studies. Qualitative evidence synthesis, meta-ethnography, thematic synthesis, and framework synthesis all fall under the ENTREQ umbrella. If your study follows PRISMA 2020 for the search and screening phases, ENTREQ should be used alongside PRISMA to cover the synthesis methodology and findings integration components that PRISMA does not address.

Understanding SRQR: Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research

SRQR was published in 2014 by O’Brien and colleagues in Academic Medicine, following a synthesis of recommendations from existing qualitative reporting guidelines across multiple disciplines. The goal was to create a single comprehensive framework applicable to the full diversity of qualitative methods rather than restricting guidance to one paradigm or data type.

The 21 SRQR items span the complete research arc: from problem formulation and design rationale through researcher positionality and sampling, to data collection procedures, analysis approach, findings presentation, interpretation, and dissemination. Unlike COREQ, SRQR explicitly includes items on reflexivity, researcher characteristics, and the theoretical or epistemological framework underlying the study — aspects that are critical in phenomenological, constructivist, and interpretivist research traditions.

SRQR items that are frequently under-reported in submitted manuscripts include: the qualitative approach and research paradigm (item 3), researcher characteristics and reflexivity (items 4–5), context of data collection (item 8), and the process of member checking or negative case analysis (item 16). Reviewers at journals with explicit SRQR requirements frequently flag these omissions during peer review. Completing the 21-item checklist before finalising the methods section — rather than retrospectively — prevents the need to return to raw data or expand a compressed methods section at revision stage.

Understanding COREQ: Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research

COREQ was published in 2007 by Tong and colleagues in the International Journal of Quality in Health Care and has become the dominant qualitative reporting checklist in health, nursing, and clinical research. Its 32 items are organised across three domains that reflect the structure of methods sections expected in health journals: domain 1 covers the research team and reflexivity; domain 2 covers study design; domain 3 covers data collection and analysis.

Domain 1 — research team and reflexivity — addresses who conducted the research, their professional background, credentials, and existing relationship with participants. This domain requires authors to address the influence of researcher identity on both data collection and interpretation, which is a critical concern in interview-based qualitative research where the interviewer’s positionality can systematically shape what participants disclose.

Domain 2 — study design — specifies the theoretical framework, participant selection method, recruitment approach (purposive, snowball, convenience), the setting and time frame of interviews, and the method used to collect data. Domain 2 items are where methodological detail is most commonly sparse in submitted manuscripts; reviewers expect to see the number of participants, selection rationale, and recruitment rate alongside the description of the interview process.

Domain 3 — data collection and analysis — covers interview guide development, audio or video recording, field notes, data saturation, member checking, coding approach, derivation of themes (deductive versus inductive), software used, and the overall analytical framework (thematic analysis, framework analysis, grounded theory procedures). Most journals that require COREQ expect all 32 items to be addressed in a supplementary compliance table listing item numbers, item text, and the page or section in the manuscript where each item is addressed.

Understanding ENTREQ: Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research

ENTREQ was published in 2012 by Tong and colleagues in BMC Medical Research Methodology and is the standard framework for reporting qualitative evidence syntheses. Its 21 items are structured across five domains: aim and synthesis methodology; literature search; study selection and appraisal; data extraction; and synthesis of findings.

The aim and synthesis methodology domain (items 1–4) requires authors to state the rationale for conducting a synthesis, name the specific synthesis approach used (meta-ethnography, thematic synthesis, framework synthesis, critical interpretive synthesis, or realist synthesis), cite the foundational method paper for that approach, and describe how the synthesis philosophy aligns with the study question. Authors frequently omit the synthesis approach name or cite only PRISMA 2020 without specifying the qualitative synthesis method — a common source of major revision requests in journals publishing qualitative reviews.

The literature search domain (items 5–8) covers the databases searched, the search strategy including search terms, date ranges, and grey literature sources consulted. ENTREQ synthesis searches typically cover broader sources than systematic reviews of effectiveness — including theses, conference abstracts, and grey literature databases — and ENTREQ requires these sources to be documented explicitly. Study selection and appraisal (items 9–12) addresses inclusion criteria specific to qualitative paradigms, the quality appraisal tool used (the CASP Qualitative Checklist is most common), whether quality scores influenced inclusion decisions, and inter-rater reliability for appraisal. The data extraction and synthesis of findings domains (items 13–21) address how findings were extracted, how conceptual richness of individual studies was preserved, and how interpretive inferences about the synthesised evidence were developed and documented.

SRQR vs COREQ: Key Differences for Decision-Making

Implementing the Checklist: Best Practices for Submission

The most effective approach to checklist compliance is to complete the relevant checklist alongside writing the first draft rather than retrospectively. Retrospective completion frequently reveals gaps that require returning to raw data or expanding a compressed methods section — neither of which is feasible when a submission deadline is imminent.

For SRQR and COREQ, a two-column supplementary table is the standard submission format: the first column lists each item number and item text, the second column provides the page number and section heading where the item is addressed. Reviewers verify compliance using this table without searching the manuscript body. Items that are genuinely not applicable — for example, field notes for a telephone interview study — should be listed as N/A with a one-sentence explanation rather than omitted entirely. Journals with mandatory COREQ requirements treat incomplete checklists as a submission error correctable before peer review.

For ENTREQ, the same table approach applies, but authors should additionally describe the synthesis methodology in sufficient detail for replication — naming the specific synthesis approach (meta-ethnography following Noblit and Hare; thematic synthesis following Thomas and Harden; framework synthesis following Ritchie and Spencer), citing the foundational method paper, and describing how decisions about theme development and interpretive inference were made and documented across the team. Vague references to “thematic analysis” or “qualitative synthesis” without specifying the named approach are the most common basis for ENTREQ non-compliance findings in peer review.

Journal Requirements and 2026 Updates

Major medical journals including BMJ, Lancet, and JAMA Network Open accept COREQ as the standard for interview-based qualitative studies but require the completed checklist as a supplementary file at submission. Qualitative Health Research, the field’s flagship journal, accepts SRQR and COREQ but states that authors should justify their choice if it is not self-evident from the study design. For qualitative evidence syntheses, Campbell Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the JBI Evidence Synthesis all require ENTREQ for the qualitative synthesis reporting component, alongside PRISMA 2020 for the search and selection process.

The EQUATOR Network (equator-network.org) maintains the authoritative database of all reporting guidelines. Searching “qualitative” in the EQUATOR database retrieves SRQR, COREQ, and ENTREQ alongside their development papers and associated resources. Many journals link directly to EQUATOR rather than maintaining their own guidelines lists, making it the single most reliable source for current journal-specific requirements.

Adoption and Evidence Base

COREQ is the most-cited qualitative reporting guideline in health research, and adoption data consistently demonstrate that its use raises reporting quality scores in primary qualitative studies. Research published in BMC Medical Research Methodology found that COREQ adoption corresponded to measurable improvements in the completeness of methods reporting across nursing and health services journals. The completion rate for all 32 items at submission varies considerably across journals — studies auditing published qualitative research estimate that fewer than 40% of articles fully complete all COREQ items, with domain 1 (reflexivity) and domain 3 member-checking items most commonly absent.

ENTREQ adoption has grown substantially since 2015, driven by increasing recognition of qualitative evidence synthesis as a legitimate methodological category in Cochrane and Campbell reviews. SRQR, though the most recent of the three, has shown the highest growth rate in citations across social science databases, reflecting its adoption in education, health professions education, and interdisciplinary research that cannot be adequately served by the more narrowly focused COREQ.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Can I use SRQR for an interview study instead of COREQ? Yes. SRQR covers interview-based qualitative research and any other qualitative method. If your journal explicitly requires COREQ for interview studies, use COREQ. If the journal accepts either, COREQ is typically more familiar to health journal reviewers for interview studies and may make the editorial process faster. For studies using interpretive or constructivist frameworks in disciplines outside clinical medicine, SRQR is often the more appropriate choice.

Q: Does ENTREQ replace PRISMA 2020 for qualitative systematic reviews? No — they are complementary, not alternatives. PRISMA 2020 covers the search, screening, and selection process. ENTREQ covers the synthesis methodology, appraisal, and integration of qualitative findings. Both should be completed for a qualitative systematic review submitted to a health sciences journal, and both supplementary checklists should accompany the manuscript at submission.

Q: My study uses interviews and a survey — which qualitative checklist applies? If the qualitative interview component is substantive rather than exploratory, COREQ or SRQR should be completed for the qualitative arm. For the survey arm, a quantitative checklist (STROBE for observational studies, CONSORT for trials) applies separately. Mixed-methods studies increasingly use the GRAMMS or MOREQ mixed-methods reporting guidelines to cover both components with a single framework.

Q: Are all 32 COREQ items mandatory? Journals requiring COREQ expect all 32 items to be addressed or explicitly noted as not applicable. Items that are not applicable for your study type should be listed as N/A with a brief explanation rather than omitted. Checklists with unexplained omissions are a common basis for author queries from journal editorial offices before manuscripts proceed to peer review.

References

1. O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245–1251. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388
2. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–357. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
3. Tong A, Flemming K, McInnes E, Oliver S, Craig J. Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:181. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-181

Editverse Research Team | Updated June 2026