✕

The reviewer has opted to sign this review, but Journal of Advanced Nursing's privacy policy prevents this.

Content of review 1, reviewed on October 08, 2024

  1. STROBE guideline is not appropriate for Mixed-method research. It is also not specific for Online surveys.
  2. The Introduction & Background sections are lengthy. Please consider minimizing the word count by at least 50%. Typically, 1000 words are enough.
  3. Thank you so much for having a dedicated section for the context. This is very important, and most studies neglect to describe the context for international. I really appreciate that.
  4. "This paper focuses only on the quantitative data results." This statement, after presenting the design as a mixed method, is confusing. For the design, please omit the mixed-method part and state the design used for the quantitative point. After that, you can say that this is part of a larger mixed-method study and that the qualitative part will be reported elsewhere OR cite it if it is already published.
  5. Section 4.2.: Do not repeat the aim.
  6. Report (calculate) the response rate. Please explain why it is very limited. Explain what efforts were done to 8increase it. Adress it in the limitations sections with recommendations on how to increase it in future research. Please note that the response rate (as well the characteristics of the sample) is to be reported in the results not the methods.
  7. Section 4.4.(and the whole manuscript): Do not mention the qualitative part unless you are providing relevant information to the readers of this manuscript. As long as you are not proving the qualitative data, do not confuse (or overload) the readers with irrelevant information.
  8. The survey was initially trailed with Australian nurses → Why?
  9. For each of the scales used, please mention the total score, as well as the meaning of the high score. For example, the score ranges from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher perceived self-efficacy, etc. If the scale includes more than one sub-scale, please mention an example item for each sub-scale (as you did in the occupational engagement) and explicitly mention whether the sub-scale score or the total score is used in the analysis, AND explain how the score (total or sub-scale) was computed (total, average, etc.).
  10. Analysis strategy → Data analysis.
  11. Have a separate section of the ethical considerations.
  12. Other than the excluded questionnaires, how did you manage missing data in the analysis?
  13. Did you conduct any a prior sample size calculation?
  14. Table 2: Which correlation coefficient are you using here? r?
  15. What is the novelty (unique contribution) of this study?
  16. Would you please consider geographical variability in the references used?
  17. State the full term of NZ in the Abstract.
  18. Cronbach‘s alpha coefficients factors range from .72 and .90, .73 and .86, and .73 and .83 respectively. → Are this from your research or previous research? In the other scales, you state the results of previous research in the text AND the results of your own research in Table 1. Please be consistent across all scales.
  19. The ABSTRACT needs to be more informative by elaborating on the Method part.
  20. If the current manuscript is from a bigger project from which other papers were published, please explicitly state that in the manuscript and cite the published papers, if any.

Source

    © 2024 the Reviewer.