professional practice. These frameworks have gained in popularity, in part for their ability to inform health professions education,
assessment, professional mobility, and other activities. Previous research has highlighted inadequate reporting related to their
development which may then jeopardize their defensibility and utility.
Methods: This study aimed to develop a set of minimum reporting criteria for developers and authors of competency frameworks in an effort to improve transparency, clarity, interpretability and appraisal of the developmental process, and its outputs. Following
guidance from the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network, an expert panel was
assembled, and a knowledge synthesis, a Delphi study, and workshops were conducted using individuals with experience
developing competency frameworks, to identify and achieve consensus on the essential items for a competency framework
development reporting guideline.
Results: An initial checklist was developed by the 35-member expert panel and the research team. Following the steps listed above, a final reporting guideline including 20 essential items across five sections (title and abstract; framework development; development
process; testing; and funding/conflicts of interest) was developed.
Conclusion: The COmpeteNcy FramEwoRk Development in Health Professions (CONFERD-HP) reporting guideline permits a greater
understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for competency framework development in the