Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to review the manuscript entitled “Linking Nursing Outcomes Classification to Self- and Family Management Framework‎”. Generally, this is a well-written paper with clear implications for nursing practice and the field of nursing diagnoses. I appreciate the excellent work of the authors and agree that incorporation of frameworks such as to Self- and Family Management can be valuable. However, there are several sections that need some amendments to strengthen the manuscript. Please find my comments and suggestions for your consideration.
Major Comments
1. The introduction is well-written and offers a clear definition of self-management and highlights the importance of this paper. However, an explicit definition of chronic illness is required to better contextualize the use of this framework.
2. The background offers an excellent overview of the Self- and Family Management Framework (SFMF). However, please consider providing some literature to substantiate the usefulness of this framework in practice and research. I believe it could strengthen the case for using this framework. Also, please provide a rationale why this framework was chosen. Are there any other available frameworks that could have been used? If so, what are other existing frameworks and how are they different from this framework?
3. Under Data Sources—Design—The authors noted that they developed a team of five nurse experts with seven to 30 years of experience. Please consider providing more explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria for these nursing experts.
4. Under Final step of the mapping process—please consider highlighting any key differences among experts’ views that could add further depth to the mapping process. In this step and the preceding step, more elaboration of the linking and mapping process can enable readers to better understand the role of experts and the robustness of the process.
5. The authors noted that they used Kappa and other statistic to establish validity. In Delphi type studies, experts often offer open ended responses about the studied topic. Did the authors receive any descriptive responses? If yes, how they guided the decision making process? Please elaborate
Also, discuss how researchers address their biases and pre-conceived ideas during the interpretation.
6. Under implications, please consider how the incorporation of SFMF framework into NANDA nursing diagnoses could be helpful.
7. The authors noted many benefits of using this framework and the linked outcomes. However, perhaps a discussion of potential challenges that researchers, and practitioners can face while utilizing this approach warrant some discussion.
Minor Comments
• There are several typos, APA, and grammatical errors throughout the manuscript. Please carefully revisit your manuscript for these errors and reconcile.
I hope this review is helpful. Thank you

Thank you for considering my suggestions and revising your manuscript. All of my comments have been adequately addressed and the quality of manuscript has improved. Therefore, I have no additional comments. Thank you for your great revisions.