Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Nov 27;21(6):549-555.
doi: 10.1370/afm.3029.

Improving the Reporting of Primary Care Research: Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care-the CRISP Statement

Affiliations

Improving the Reporting of Primary Care Research: Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care-the CRISP Statement

William R Phillips et al. Ann Fam Med. .

Abstract

Primary care (PC) is a unique clinical specialty and research discipline with its own perspectives and methods. Research in this field uses varied research methods and study designs to investigate myriad topics. The diversity of PC presents challenges for reporting, and despite the proliferation of reporting guidelines, none focuses specifically on the needs of PC. The Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care (CRISP) Checklist guides reporting of PC research to include the information needed by the diverse PC community, including practitioners, patients, and communities. CRISP complements current guidelines to enhance the reporting, dissemination, and application of PC research findings and results. Prior CRISP studies documented opportunities to improve research reporting in this field. Our surveys of the international, interdisciplinary, and interprofessional PC community identified essential items to include in PC research reports. A 2-round Delphi study identified a consensus list of items considered necessary. The CRISP Checklist contains 24 items that describe the research team, patients, study participants, health conditions, clinical encounters, care teams, interventions, study measures, settings of care, and implementation of findings/results in PC. Not every item applies to every study design or topic. The CRISP guidelines inform the design and reporting of (1) studies done by PC researchers, (2) studies done by other investigators in PC populations and settings, and (3) studies intended for application in PC practice. Improved reporting of the context of the clinical services and the process of research is critical to interpreting study findings/results and applying them to diverse populations and varied settings in PC.Annals "Online First" article.

Keywords: Delphi studies; article; authors; checklist; consensus; editors; guidelines; journals; primary care; publishing; research; research design; research impact; research report; reviewers; stakeholder participation; surveys and questionnaires.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care reporting item Checklist and Instructions. CRISP = Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care; D = discussion; I = introduction; M = methods; N = no; NA = not applicable, R = results; Y = yes. Instructions: (1) The CRISP Checklist aids researchers in meeting readers’ needs by including content that our primary care research community feels is important for the validity, quality, and usefulness of primary care research reports. Authors and editors make final decisions. (2) Primary care research involves a wide variety of methods, study designs, topics, and settings; thus, not all items apply to all studies. Please respond to each item but note if it is not applicable for your study. If an item is missing from your report but applies to your study, simply note that and provide some brief explanation of why it is not included. (3) Authors should also use other reporting guidelines appropriate for their study and report. Some CRISP items may overlap with other guidelines. Version 1.0, published: October 4, 2023, CRISP (https://crisp-pc.org/). a For more information plus explanation, and examples of each item, see the Supplemental Appendix. b Indicate whether the item is included in your report: yes, no, or not applicable. If the item applies to the study design but is not included in the report, please provide an explanation. c Suggested location for the item in research reports according to the IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) format. d Notes on the location of the item in your report (by line, page, or section) or reason for omission of the item from the report.

Comment in

  • Commentary on the CRISP Statement.
    Rodríguez JE, van Vugt VA, Gorin SS. Rodríguez JE, et al. Ann Fam Med. 2023 Nov-Dec;21(6):482. doi: 10.1370/afm.3066. Ann Fam Med. 2023. PMID: 38012034 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Glasziou P, Altman DG, Bossuyt P, et al. . Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet. 2014; 383(9913): 267-276. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62228-X - DOI - PubMed
    1. Moher D. Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers. BMC Med. 2018; 16(1): 233. 10.1186/s12916-018-1226-0 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chalmers I, Glasziou P.. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet. 2009; 374(9683): 86-89. 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60329-9 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bilbro NA, Hirst A, Paez A, et al. ; IDEAL Collaboration Reporting Guidelines Working Group . The IDEAL reporting guidelines: a Delphi consensus statement stage specific recommendations for reporting the evaluation of surgical innovation. Ann Surg. 2021; 273(1): 82-85. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004180 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Higginson IJ, Evans CJ, Grande G, et al. ; MORECare . Evaluating complex interventions in end-of-life care: the MORECare statement on good practice generated by a synthesis of transparent expert consultations and systematic reviews. BMC Med. 2013; 24; 11: 111. 10.1186/1741-7015-11-111 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources