Table 2. Comprehensiveness of reporting in included studies.

Reporting Criteria	No (%) N = 68		References of studies reporting each criterion
Characteristics of research team:
Interviewer or facilitator identified	27	(40)	[19, 27, 36–56] [57–60]
Experience and training	30	(44)	[19–21, 37, 38, 42, 46, 47, 49, 55, 61–76] [57–60]
Relationship with participants:
Relationship established before study started	9	(13)	[42, 45, 61, 68, 70, 77, 78] [57, 60]
Participant Selection:
Sampling method (e.g. snowball, purposive, convenience)	58	(85)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–46, 48–50, 52–56, 62–69, 71, 73, 75–90] [57–60, 91–94]
Method of approach	65	(96)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–49, 51–56, 61–75, 77–90, 95–97] [57–60, 91–94]
Sample size	68	(100)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–56, 61–90, 95–98] [57–60, 91–94]
Number or reasons for non-participation	19	(28)	[19, 20, 36–39, 43, 44, 48, 49, 52, 53, 56, 75, 79, 83] [57, 59, 60]
Setting:
Setting of data collection	45	(66)	[20, 27, 36–47, 52–56, 62, 65, 66, 68–70, 73–75, 78, 82–84, 88–90, 96–98] [57–60, 91–93]
Presence of non-participants	3	(4)	[59, 60, 94]
Description of sample	66	(97)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36, 38–56, 61, 62, 64–90, 95–98] [57–60, 91–94]
Data Collection:
Interview guide	58	(85)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–46, 49, 50, 52–54, 56, 61–71, 73–78, 80–84, 87–89, 96–98] [57–60, 91–94]
Repeat interviews	36	(53)	[20, 21, 27, 28, 37–39, 41, 42, 46, 49–51, 54, 55, 61, 64, 66–69, 71–74, 77, 80–82, 84, 87, 90, 96, 97] [57, 60]
Audio or visual recording	63	(93)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–55, 61–68, 70–82, 84, 85, 87–90, 95–98] [57–60, 91–93]
Field notes	31	(46)	[19–21, 27, 37, 39–43, 45, 47, 62–65, 67, 68, 71, 76, 78, 80, 82, 85, 87, 88, 90] [57, 58, 60, 91]
Duration	48	(71)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–41, 43–46, 48, 51, 53–55, 62, 64–67, 69–71, 73, 74, 77–80, 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 96, 97] [57–60, 91–93]
Translation and interpretation	6	(9)	[37, 53, 56, 68, 72, 84]
Protocol for data preparation and transcription	63	(93)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–38, 40–42, 44–55, 61–75, 77–80, 82–90, 95–98] [57–60, 91–94]
Data (or theoretical) saturation	28	(41)	[36, 37, 40, 44–48, 53, 54, 62, 63, 65, 66, 70, 72, 77–79, 82, 83, 85, 86] [57, 58, 60, 91, 93]
Data Analysis:
Researcher/expert triangulation (multiple researchers involved in coding and analysis)	52	(76)	[19, 21, 27, 28, 36–53, 55, 61, 62, 64–68, 70, 73, 74, 76–80, 82, 84, 85, 87, 88, 90, 95–97] [57, 59, 60, 92, 93]
Translation	4	(6)	[53, 56, 68, 84]
Derivation of themes	62	(91)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–55, 61–71, 73–75, 77–80, 82–85, 87, 88, 90, 95–98] [57–60, 91–94]
Use of software	41	(60)	[19–21, 28, 36, 38, 40–48, 52, 54, 55, 61, 62, 64, 65, 67, 71, 72, 74, 77, 78, 80, 82–84, 87, 89, 96, 97] [57, 59, 60, 92, 93]
Participant feedback or member checking	10	(15)	[37, 54, 63, 78, 84, 85, 88] [57, 60, 91]
Reporting:
Participant quotations provided	66	(97)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36–56, 61–90, 96–98] [57–60, 91–94]
Range and depth of insight into prostate cancer screening	59	(87)	[19–21, 27, 28, 36, 38–56, 61–68, 70, 71, 73–79, 81–86, 88–90, 96–98] [58, 60, 91, 92, 94]