Contents
Academy · Concepts & Definitions · Reporting guideline selector
Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector
An incorrect reporting guideline, however completely applied, produces an incorrect checklist. Matching the study design to the appropriate guideline is therefore the first decision, preceding any item-by-item work.
Reporting guidelines are matched to specific study designs: CONSORT 2025 for randomised controlled trials, PRISMA 2020 for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, STROBE for observational studies (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional), STARD 2015 for diagnostic accuracy studies, TRIPOD+AI for prediction model studies, and ARRIVE 2.0 for in vivo animal research.
Learning objectives
- The reporting guideline that corresponds to each study design.
- The location of the authoritative, current version of each guideline.
- The appropriate course of action when a study design does not correspond clearly to any single guideline.
Common misconceptions
- “STROBE covers randomised trials as well as observational studies.” STROBE is designed specifically for observational study designs (cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies); randomised trials use CONSORT instead.
- “Any checklist may be adapted informally to a new study design if none fits exactly.” Where no existing guideline matches, the EQUATOR Network (which indexes reporting guidelines) is the authoritative place to check for a more specific or newer guideline before improvising an informal checklist.
Matching guidelines to study designs
Current major reporting guidelines by design: CONSORT 2025 for randomised controlled trials1; PRISMA 2020 for systematic reviews and meta-analyses2; STROBE for observational studies (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional); STARD 2015 for diagnostic accuracy studies; TRIPOD+AI for studies developing or validating a prediction model, including those using AI/machine learning methods; ARRIVE 2.0 for in vivo animal research.
Studies combining more than one design
Some studies span more than one design element — for example, a systematic review that also includes a meta-analysis of individual patient data, or a trial that also validates a prediction model as a secondary analysis. In these cases, more than one guideline may apply to different sections of the same manuscript, and each relevant section should be checked against its own matching guideline rather than a single guideline being selected for the whole paper.
Locating the current authoritative version
For any study design, the EQUATOR Network maintains an index of reporting guidelines and is the most reliable place to confirm the current, authoritative version of a specific guideline, rather than relying on a cached or previously saved copy that may predate an update (as CONSORT 2010 was superseded by CONSORT 2025).
Key points
Key points
Matching the study design to a reporting guideline is a step distinct from completing the checklist itself: CONSORT for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), PRISMA for systematic reviews, STROBE for observational studies, STARD for diagnostic accuracy, TRIPOD+AI for prediction models and ARRIVE 2.0 for animal research. The EQUATOR Network is the authoritative source for confirming the current version.
Practical application
Practical application
- The study design should be identified before a guideline is selected, not after drafting. The category into which the study falls (RCT, observational, diagnostic accuracy, prediction model, animal research or systematic review) should be confirmed.
- In a mixed-design study, authors should check whether more than one guideline applies. Each relevant guideline should be applied to its corresponding section rather than one guideline being imposed on the whole manuscript.
- The guideline version should be confirmed through the EQUATOR Network before use. This identifies superseded versions (such as CONSORT 2010 following the publication of CONSORT 2025) before they are applied to a current manuscript.
Frequently asked questions
The EQUATOR Network's full index should be consulted, as it covers many more specific study types and continues to be updated with new guidelines.
Yes — the CARE guidelines are the commonly used reporting standard for case reports, distinct from the designs listed above.
Many journals specifically require the applicable guideline's checklist at submission for the relevant study designs; the specific journal’s instructions for authors should be checked.
References
- Hopewell S, Chan A-W, Collins GS, et al. CONSORT 2025 statement. PLOS Medicine. 2025;22(4):e1004587. read 10 October 2026. View on PubMed Central
- Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. read 10 October 2026. View on BMJ
Every source above is a peer-reviewed article, a publisher’s record of one, or a standard issued by the body that owns it. Each carries the date it was last read. Where a standard moves, this article is revised rather than left up with a note.
How to cite this article
Pick your referencing style and copy it. Your university or target journal may vary the punctuation — check its guide if it has one.
Pubrica Academy. (2026, October 10). Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector. Pubrica. https://pubrica.com/academy/infographics/reporting-guideline-selector/
Pubrica Academy. “Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector.” Pubrica, 10 Oct. 2026, pubrica.com/academy/infographics/reporting-guideline-selector/.
Pubrica Academy (2026) Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector. Pubrica. Available at: https://pubrica.com/academy/infographics/reporting-guideline-selector/ (Accessed: 15 October 2026).
Pubrica Academy. “Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector.” Pubrica. October 10, 2026. https://pubrica.com/academy/infographics/reporting-guideline-selector/
Pubrica Academy, ‘Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector’ (Pubrica, 10 October 2026) <https://pubrica.com/academy/infographics/reporting-guideline-selector/> accessed 15 October 2026.
Pubrica Academy. Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector. [Internet]. Pubrica; 2026 Oct 10 [cited 2026 Oct 15]. Available from: https://pubrica.com/academy/infographics/reporting-guideline-selector/
Pubrica Academy, “Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector,” Pubrica, Oct. 10, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://pubrica.com/academy/infographics/reporting-guideline-selector/
@misc{reporting_guideline_selector_2026,
author = {{Pubrica Academy}},
title = {Reporting Guideline Selection by Study Design: A Quick-Reference Selector},
howpublished = {Pubrica},
year = {2026},
month = {oct},
url = {https://pubrica.com/academy/infographics/reporting-guideline-selector/},
note = {Accessed: <span data-cite-acc="iso">2026-10-15</span>}
}This article is written to be learned from. Cite it if you are referring to what it says; if you are using the evidence behind it, cite the sources listed above instead.
Guideline selector quick table
The study design should be matched to the correct guideline.
Randomised controlled trial → CONSORT 2025 Systematic review / meta-analysis → PRISMA 2020 Observational study (cohort/case-control/cross-sectional) → STROBE Diagnostic accuracy study → STARD 2015 Prediction model study (incl. AI/ML) → TRIPOD+AI Animal research (in vivo) → ARRIVE 2.0 Case report → CARE No clear match → check the EQUATOR Network index
Pubrica AcademyWritten and maintained by Pubrica’s subject matter experts. Articles are revised when the underlying standards change, and each article states the date on which it was last reviewed.
How Pubrica can help
Pubrica identifies the appropriate reporting guideline or guidelines for a study at the planning stage, before drafting begins, and verifies them against the current authoritative version.