The Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary care (CRISP) provides a new research reporting guideline to meet the needs of the producers and users of primary care (PC) research. Developed through an iterative program of research, including investigators, practicing clinicians, patients, community representatives, and educators, the CRISP Checklist guides PC researchers across the spectrum of research methods, study designs, and topics. This pilot test included a variety of team members using the CRISP Checklist for writing, revising, and reviewing PC research reports. All or most of the 15 participants reported that the checklist was easy to use, improved research reports, and should be recommended by PC research journals. The checklist is adaptable to different study types; not all items apply to all reports. The CRISP Checklist can help meet the needs of PC research when used in parallel with existing guidelines that focus on specific methods and limited topics.

The Standards Committee of the Experimental Research Section of the American Political Science Association has produced reporting guidelines that aim to increase the clarity of experimental research reports. This paper describes the Committee's rationale for the guidelines it developed and includes our Recommended Reporting Standards for Experiments (Laboratory, Field, Survey). It begins with a content analysis of current reporting practices in published experimental research. Although researchers report most important aspects of their experimental designs and data, we find substantial omissions that could undermine the clarity of research practices and the ability of researchers to assess the validity of study conclusions. With the need for reporting guidelines established, the report describes the process the Committee used to develop the guidelines, the feedback received during the comment period, and the rationale for the final version of the guidelines.

In this special article we describe a number of reporting guidelines endorsed by the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) group for a range of research designs that commonly appear in scientific journals: systematic reviews, clinical trials with and without randomisation, observational studies, n-of-1 (or single-case experimental design) trials, and diagnostic studies. We also consider reporting guidelines for studies using qualitative methodology. In addition to reporting guidelines, we present method quality rating scales, which aim to measure risk of bias that threatens the internal validity of a study. Advantages of reporting guidelines and method quality rating scales for authors include the provision of a structure by which to improve the clarity and transparency of report writing; for reviewers and readers advantages include a method by which to critically appraise an article. Brain Impairment endorses these reporting guidelines and applies them within the review process for submissions to the journal.