Reply from the author for the letter to the editor concerning: Exploring mindfulness interventions for stress resilience in newly graduated nurses: A qualitative study

Dear Editor, We thank Dr. Shrivastava Saurabh for sharing his thoughts on the “Exploring mindfulness interventions for stress resilience in newly graduated nurses: A qualitative study” article [1]. First, I would like to clarify that a total of 31 participants participated in the study. Among them, 25 completed more than half of the sessions, and out of those 25, 14 completed the entire 8-week program. I appreciate your concern about the validity and reliability of this study. Due to the text length limitations, providing a detailed explanation of all the tests for validity and reliability is impossible. To enhance credibility, researchers can engage in prolonged involvement, spending adequate time on-site to build rapport with participants and gain a deeper understanding of their perspectives [2]. The second author, a mindfulness instructor and interviewer, established strong relationships with participants during the 8-week mindfulness training, possessing sufficient ability to understand their experiences, behaviors, and beliefs. The study’s first author, a nursing manager, could not directly participate in the mindfulness sessions due to ethical considerations but had discussed the course content with the second author after each session. The confirmability of qualitative research can be strengthened by peer debriefing, member checking, and reflexive journaling to reduce researcher bias [2]. We conducted member checking and peer review to ensure the study’s credibility by confirming the transcripts’ accuracy with the participants each week and through discussions between the first and second authors. The audit trail helps establish the dependability of the research and offers insights into possible biases [2]. The first and third authors reviewed the transcripts, audio recordings, and weekly discussion records as an audit trail to ensure the study’s dependability. Unfortunately, we did not conduct a review by an external expert, but we ensured the confirmability of the study through continuous reflection. Thank you for your excellent suggestion. We will consider using the Kirkpatrick Model [3] to evaluate the effectiveness of the teaching in future research. Data availability statement The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to the IRB consent form explicitly states that the data will not be disclosed and only analyzed results can be published but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.