EDITORIAL NOTE doi:10.1111/add.

12857

Guidance for reporting qualitative manuscripts

Reporting guidelines have proved useful in improving
the communication of research methods and findings.
Addiction requires that authors report randomized
controlled trials using the CONSORT (Consolidated
Standards of Reporting Trials) guidelines [1]. Authors
wishing to communicate results from other methodo-
logical approaches (cohort, case–control, cross-
sectional, non-randomized evaluations, systematic
reviews and meta-analyses) are also asked to consult
appropriate guidelines such as STROBE (Strengthening
the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiol-
ogy) [2], TREND (Transparent Reporting of Evalua-
tions with Non-randomized Designs) [3] and PRISMA
(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews
and Meta-Analyses) [4]. Key guidelines for reporting
qualitative studies include COREQ (Consolidated
Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies) [5], RATS
(Qualitative Research Review Guidelines) [6] and

Table 1 Authors should also adhere to Addiction’s generic author guidelines (http://www.addictionjournal.org/pages/authors)

Title and abstract 1. Identify the study as qualitative in the title, abstract or keywords
2. Ensure that the ‘citable statement’ (http://addictionjournal.org/pages/writing-the-abstract) is commensurate with
a study that identifies the existence, occurrence or understanding of phenomena; but not prevalence, association
or causation
Introduction 3. Specify the research question(s) clearly (‘aims and objectives’ may be specified instead of ‘research questions’, but
studies which merely seek to describe phenomena will not normally be acceptable—studies should provide
theoretical insights into policies, mechanisms or processes and/or have potential transferability to other
populations and settings)
4. For each research question/aim, (a) explain why addressing it is important, (b) summarize previous relevant
research and (unless it is obvious) (c) specify how and why the proposed methodology will be used
5. In conducting 4, it is essential to (a) define any core concepts and (b) specify any relevant theory or conceptual
framework(s) and how they are being applied
Methods 6. Describe and justify the data set, including its size and selection criteria (note that the number of participants in a
qualitative study will depend upon the question(s) being asked of the data)
7. Report relevant contextual information on the setting and participants
8. Document the data collection processes
9. Describe the ethical approval process, and procedures for securing informed consent and preserving anonymity
10. State and justify the analytical approach (e.g. Framework Analysis, Narrative Analysis, Content Analysis,
Grounded Theory, Discourse Analysis, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, etc.)
11. Describe the data coding process (including the use of any software, double coding and whether codes were
derived inductively or deductively)
12. Describe how themes and concepts were identified from the data and whether any deviant or negative cases were
explored
Results 13. Ensure that the results are linked 1 : 1 with the research question(s)/aims and objectives
14. Report the findings from the analyses using supporting quotations and fieldnotes within the main text, and
include quotations and fieldnotes in the word count
15. Present any quotations or fieldnotes in a way that enables the reader to assess the range of statements/responses
made by the participants (e.g. give participants unique identifiers and provide basic demographic information,
such as gender and age)
16. Ensure that distinctions between the data and the researchers’ interpretation(s) of the data are evident
17. Ensure that participants cannot be identified
18. Strive for maximum transparency with regard to the numbers of participants giving particular responses or types
of response without making claims that might be interpreted as prevalence estimates
Discussion and 19. Summarize the findings in terms commensurate with the research questions/aims and objectives
Conclusions 20. For each finding, discuss its implications taking into account concordance with, or deviation from, expectation or
previous studies
21. Suggest what further research could usefully be conducted to confirm or extend each finding
22. Describe the limitations of the study in terms, where appropriate, of (a) the setting, (b) sample/data set or
sample/data selection processes, (c) methods used to elicit responses or potential biases in responding, (d)
information that was not obtained that may be relevant and (e) analytical methods
23. State the main conclusions in terms that are consistent with the citable statement in the abstract and make clear
the importance and novelty of the findings

© 2015 Society for the Study of Addiction Addiction, 110, 549–550

550 Editorial note
CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) [7]. We
have examined these and decided that we need to
develop a set of guidelines specifically for the kind of
research we seek to publish in Addiction.
The guidance in Table 1 is intended to provide
support to Addiction authors by setting out some
general expectations of a qualitative manuscript. The
broad aims are to ensure a degree of consistency
with the Journal’s other manuscript types in terms of
reporting standards; to help qualitative researchers
submitting to the Journal by prompting them to
consider carefully all aspects of their study design
and analysis when preparing their submissions; and
to assist readers and reviewers in evaluating the qual-
itative papers we publish. Authors are encouraged to
interpret particular items within our guidelines flexi-
bly, depending on their methods and approach, and
to consult other published guidelines for qualitative
research as appropriate. As always, we are keen to
receive any comments or feedback.
Declaration of Interests
Joanne Neale: None. Robert West has received travel
funds and hospitality from, and undertaken research
and consultancy for, pharmaceutical companies that
manufacture or research products aimed at helping
smokers to stop. These products include nicotine
replacement therapies and Zyban (bupropion). This
has led to payments to him personally and to his
institution. He undertakes lectures and training in
smoking cessation methods which have led to pay-
ments to him personally and to his institution. He
has received research grants from medical charities
and government departments.
© 2015 Society for the Study of Addiction
JOANNE NEALE1
ROBERT WEST2,3
Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College
London, London, UK1
Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, University
College London, London UK2 and National Centre for Smoking
Cessation and Training, London, UK3
E-mail: joanne.neale@kcl.ac.uk
References
1. Moher D., Schulz K. F., Altman D. G. The CONSORT statement:
revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports
of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet 2001; 357: 1191–4.
2. von Elm E., Altman D. G., Egger M., Pocock S. J., Gøtzsche P. C.,
Vandenbroucke J. P., STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the
Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)
statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin
Epidemiol 2008; 61: 344–9.
3. Des Jarlais D. C., Lyles C., Crepaz N., the TREND Group. Improv-
ing the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of
behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND state-
ment. Am J Public Health 2004; 94: 361–6.
4. Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G., the PRISMA
Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and
Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA Statement. BMJ 2009; 339:
b2535. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b2535
5. 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: 349–57.
6. Clark J. P.. How to peer review a qualitative manuscript. In:
Godlee F., Jefferson T. editors. Peer Review in Health Sciences,
2nd edn. London: BMJ Books; 2003, pp. 219–35.
7. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). Qualitative
research checklist 31.05.13. Available at: http://www.cas-
pinternational.org/mod_product/uploads/CASP%20Qualitati-
ve%20Research%20Checklist%2031.05.13.pdf (accessed 13
January 2015).
Addiction, 110, 549–550