Grounded theory is a prominent research method in qualitative studies. This method enables researchers to conceptualize, identify problems, theorize about the studied phenomena, generalize findings, and disseminate knowledge. Despite its widespread acceptance, many researchers misunderstand and misapply grounded theory, which impacts the quality of their studies. Neglecting the indicators for assessing the quality of grounded theory is detrimental, particularly in practical fields. Therefore, it is crucial to focus on quality assessment indicators to ensure the correct application of grounded theory. This systematic approach's structured design offers greater clarity in quality assessment. This study adopts a qualitative approach with a meta-synthesis method, conducted across seven steps as outlined by Sandelowski and Barroso. The research aims to answer the question: What indicators assess the quality of studies employing grounded theory methodology (systematic design)? The study reviews all accessible full-text English-language resources, including books, dissertations, and scientific articles. Using reputable databases such as Scopus and Google Scholar between 2019 and 2025, 21 sources were selected from an initial pool of 2,262 based on specific criteria. For validation, the research utilized the CASP framework, Cohen's Kappa coefficient, and supervisor feedback. 831 initial indicators were identified and categorized into 34 sub-criteria and 20 main criteria. These include: Clarity of Purpose: Researcher awareness and expertise in qualitative methods. Researcher Attitudes: Emotional engagement with the research topic, enthusiasm, and commitment to quality.Methodological Integrity: Consistency, clarity, and accuracy in the research design and data collection process.Conceptual Development: Effectiveness in explaining and justifying generated theories, emphasizing relevance, clarity, and applicability. Reflectivity: The ability to adapt and refine concepts based on data without preconceived notions. The findings section of this research can be categorized into several dimensions. These dimensions include: preliminary, researcher, method, categorization, and reporting of findings, textual, and technical. They should use the criteria for clarity of purpose, the researcher's role, method, generating concepts and theories from data, and criteria related to the textual and technical dimensions of the report as a basis for conducting and evaluating studies performed using this method. This will allow us to witness an increasing improvement in the quality of these studies. This research represents a significant leap forward in standardizing quality assessment for grounded theory studies. The developed framework not only enables systematic evaluation of existing research but also provides clear guidelines for designing future studies. Implementing these indicators can lead to the development of more profound, applicable, and valid theories. Moreover, these criteria could serve as a foundation for creating evaluation tools for other qualitative methods. Scientific journals and research institutions can adopt these standards to enhance publication quality in qualitative research. Ultimately, by minimizing methodological errors, this framework will significantly boost the academic credibility and societal impact of qualitative studies, fostering more rigorous and influential research outcomes across various disciplines. It is suggested that researchers, in order to improve the quality of their studies, pay attention to the findings of this research when using the grounded theory method.