CASP Elements	Score (0 to 5)	Individual CASP Element Evaluations with Supporting Evidence. For each lettered item, show one of these: page number where the information is provided; no if the information is not present; n/a if the information is not applicable to the specific article. In the space following "Rationale," briefly describe your reasons for assigning a score between 0 and 5
1: The author (a) made a clear statement of the research aims and goals, (b) described the importance of the research, (c) established its relevance, and (d) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) (d) Rationale for CASP element score:
2: The author clearly established (a) the appropriateness of qualitative research methodology in general to the research goals, (b) the fit between the selected qualitative research methodology and the research question(s), and (c) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) Rationale for CASP element score:
3: The author clearly (a) described the research design, (b) explained the design's appropriateness to address the aims of the research, (c) explained how, when, or why the design was selected, (d) established fit between design described and design implemented; and (e) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Rationale for CASP element score:
4: The author clearly (a) identified the sampling strategy, (b) justified its appropriateness to the aims of the research and study's design; (c) described the process and outcomes of the recruitment strategy, (d) described the study's participants; (e) explained how, where, when, and why the sites/participants were selected; (f) protected the identities of the participants; and (g) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) Rationale for CASP element score:
5: The author clearly (a) described how data were collected and processed; (b) described who collected and processed the data; (c) explained how the data collection and processing addressed the research issue; (d) justified the setting for data collection; (e) if the methods were modified during the study, explained how and why; (f) acknowledged if data saturation had been achieved; and (g) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) Rationale for CASP element score:
6: The author clearly (a) described the relationship between researcher and participants; (b) explained how potential bias was managed with the methodological choices made throughout the research study; (c) described how and when responses were made to events during the study and whether or not these acts had implications for any changes in the research design; and (d) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) (d) Rationale for CASP element score:
7: The author clearly (a) described how ethical issues been taken into consideration; (b) provided sufficient details of how research was explained to participants for the reader to assess whether ethical standards were maintained; (c) discussed any issues raised such as informed consent or confidentiality and explained how effects of the study on the participants during and after the study were handled; (d) described how approval has been sought and secured from an appropriate ethics committee; and (e) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Rationale for CASP element score:
8: The author clearly (a) provided an in-depth description how data were analyzed and by whom; (b) described a sufficiently rigorous data analysis process; (c) described a data analysis process consistent with the methodology and design described; (d) explained to what extent contradictory data were taken into account; (e) described a quality control system intended to manage researcher's own role, potential bias and influence during analysis and selection of data for presentation; and (f) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Rationale for CASP element score:
9: The author clearly (a) stated explicit findings; (b) supported findings coherently with sufficient data; (c) presented adequate discussion of the evidence both for and against the researcher's arguments; (d) discussed the credibility of the findings; and (e) discussed findings in relation to the original research questions.		(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Rationale for CASP element score:
10: The author clearly (a) described the value of the research; (b) explained limitations of the research findings; (c) discussed contributions study makes to existing knowledge or understanding of the phenomenon; (d) considered the findings in relation to current practice or policy, or relevant research-based literature; (e) identified new areas where research is necessary; (f) discussed whether or how the findings can be transferred to other populations or considered other ways the research may be used; and (g) provided supporting citations.		(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) Rationale for CASP element score:
Total Score (0 to50)		Overall Evaluation of manuscript: