S1 Data -

<div><p>Background</p><p>Scientific literature is presented in complex language, most frequently in English, and includes technical jargon that represents a challenge to comprehension of an English as a foreign language (EFL) nursing student. Yet scientific literature is a powerful and trustworthy source of evidence to guide nursing practice.</p><p>Purpose</p><p>The aim is to examine two reading interventions (Translation vs Synthesization) and to determine which one produces long-term sustainability effects in scientific research reading comprehension.</p><p>Method</p><p>A two-group posttest-only randomized comparative design was used in which 120 participants were randomly assigned to two groups. Several instruments were used to collect the data.</p><p>Results</p><p>Study findings showed that the synthesization group significantly produced better results when compared with the translation group on both the immediate (<i>p</i> = 0.01) and the delayed (<i>p</i> = 0.013) reading comprehension tests. It shows also that gender differences have a significant impact on reading comprehension with a favor to males in the long-term reading comprehension outcome (<i>p</i> = 0.038) of synthesization and females in the short-term reading comprehension outcome (<i>p</i> = 0.015) of translation. English proficiency was significant with determination, metacognitive, and social skills in the synthesization group (p = 0.00, p = 0.01, p = 0.007 respectively).</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>The results suggested that synthesization could be an effective reading approach in improving EFL nursing students’ reading comprehension of scientific literature.</p></div>