The science of quality and safety is different from traditional science in so many ways that early attempts to define improvement work as science often generated tremendous debate and even contempt in the scientific community. Further, initial efforts to share findings and disseminate knowledge in the field by way of scholarly publication were limited by an inability to conform to traditional templates used when publishing scientific findings based on hypothesis testing. In 1999, the Quality Improvement Report Guidelines¹ were published to guide manuscript preparation for studies on local quality improvement. In response to continued confusion on how to format these manuscripts in a structured, meaningful fashion, the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE) reporting guideline was released in 2008 and revised in 2015 (SQUIRE 2.0).² SQUIRE 2.0 was developed using a combination of semistructured interviews and focus groups with end users, expert engagement in the interpretation of the interviews, and pilot testing. The guideline provides direction on how to report systematic efforts in health care improvement regardless of the specific approach used. A summary of the guideline is presented in the Box. While SQUIRE is less frequently used than other frameworks (eg, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials [CONSORT]), we hope this article helps elevate its use in the field of surgery. One reason for its limited use may be the lack of requirement for its use by many journals.