Endorsement of the 32-item Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative (COREQ) and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) by Chinese journals of nursing: A survey of editors and review of journal instructions for authors

BACKGROUND: To investigate the endorsement of the 32-item Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative (COREQ) and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) in the instructions for authors (IFA) of Chinese nursing journals. The awareness of Chinese editors of the COREQ and SRQR, together with their application and requirements for following the standards, were also investigated. These findings would assist as the endorsement, application, and promotion of the COREQ and SRQR in Chinese nursing journals, and improve the reporting quality of qualitative research in nursing. METHODS: Nursing journals were identified from the National Press and Publication Administration. The IFA and applications of the COREQ and SRQR were assessed. The editors of the journals were asked about their awareness of and demand for the COREQ checklist and SRQR standards, as well as their implementation at different stages of the publication process, including manuscript submission, editing, and peer review. RESULTS: A total of 29 nursing journals were included, and only 2 journals (6.9%, 2/29) mentioned the COREQ and SRQR in their IFA. Among the 24 surveyed editors, only 45.83% (11/24) and 33.33% (8/24) were aware of the COREQ and SRQR, respectively. None of the surveyed editors required authors to follow the COREQ/SRQR at the submission stage, editors to follow COREQ/SRQR in the journal editing and processing stage, and reviewers to use the COREQ/SRQR in the expert review stage. CONCLUSION: Nursing journals in China endorsing the COREQ and SRQR constitute a small percentage of the total. In addition, both awareness and application of the COREQ and SRQR were poor among nursing journal editors. Therefore, we strongly recommend that the China Periodicals Association undertake measures to encourage and support the endorsement of biomedical research reporting guidelines in nursing journals. Also, the education and training of journal editors, researchers, and medical students on biomedical research reporting guidelines should be strengthened.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2026-04-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0346938
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Endorsement of the 32-item Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative (COREQ) and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) by Chinese journals of nursing: A survey of editors and review of journal instructions for authors

Kaiyan Hu, Bin Ma, Li Zhao, Jian Zeng
PLoS ONE
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

Endorsement of the 32-item Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative (COREQ) and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) by Chinese journals of nursing: A survey of editors and review of journal instructions for authors

Kaiyan Hu, Bin Ma, Li Zhao, Jian Zeng
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To investigate the endorsement of the 32-item Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative (COREQ) and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) in the instructions for authors (IFA) of Chinese nursing journals. The awareness of Chinese editors of the COREQ and SRQR, together with their application and requirements for following the standards, were also investigated. These findings would assist as the endorsement, application, and promotion of the COREQ and SRQR in Chinese nursing journals, and improve the reporting quality of qualitative research in nursing. METHODS: Nursing journals were identified from the National Press and Publication Administration. The IFA and applications of the COREQ and SRQR were assessed. The editors of the journals were asked about their awareness of and demand for the COREQ checklist and SRQR standards, as well as their implementation at different stages of the publication process, including manuscript submission, editing, and peer review. RESULTS: A total of 29 nursing journals were included, and only 2 journals (6.9%, 2/29) mentioned the COREQ and SRQR in their IFA. Among the 24 surveyed editors, only 45.83% (11/24) and 33.33% (8/24) were aware of the COREQ and SRQR, respectively. None of the surveyed editors required authors to follow the COREQ/SRQR at the submission stage, editors to follow COREQ/SRQR in the journal editing and processing stage, and reviewers to use the COREQ/SRQR in the expert review stage. CONCLUSION: Nursing journals in China endorsing the COREQ and SRQR constitute a small percentage of the total. In addition, both awareness and application of the COREQ and SRQR were poor among nursing journal editors. Therefore, we strongly recommend that the China Periodicals Association undertake measures to encourage and support the endorsement of biomedical research reporting guidelines in nursing journals. Also, the education and training of journal editors, researchers, and medical students on biomedical research reporting guidelines should be strengthened.

PLoS ONEVol. 21(4)
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine (CN), Lanzhou University of Technology (CN), Longgang Central Hospital (CN), Shenzhen University Health Science Center (CN), Lanzhou University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.