Factors Associated with Resilience among Thai Nursing Students in the Context of Clinical Education: A Cross-Sectional Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

First of all, I would like to congratulate the authors for submitting the manuscript.

The manuscript titled "Factors Associated with Resilience among Thai Nursing Students in the Context of Clinical Education: A Cross-sectional Study" examines the relationship between nursing students' resilience and relevant variables in the context of clinical education. The study involved 319 undergraduate nursing students in Northeast Thailand and utilized various scales to measure resilience, social support, self-directed learning, and stress. The results indicated that social support and self-directed learning had a positive association with resilience, while stress had a negative association. The final model accounted for 43.4% of the variance in the resilience score.

The study employs multiple regression analysis to identify factors associated with resilience, offering a comprehensive view of how different variables interact. The sample size is adequate, and the use of standardized scales for measurement ensures reliability.

The multiple regression analysis is appropriately conducted, with the results indicating significant associations between resilience and the studied variables. The report of β values and confidence intervals enhances the transparency of the results.

The interpretation of the results aligns well with the data presented. The authors correctly identify social support, self-directed learning, and stress as significant factors influencing resilience.

While the findings are relevant, they are specific to Thai nursing students, which may limit their applicability to other populations. The cross-sectional nature of the study also means that causality cannot be established.

While the findings are relevant, they are specific to Thai nursing students, which may limit their applicability to other populations. The cross-sectional nature of the study also means that causality cannot be established.

The authors acknowledge the limitations of their study, including the use of convenience sampling and the potential for social desirability bias in responses. These limitations are important to consider when interpreting the results.

To further improve the article, you could consider asking the following questions:

How representative is the sample of the larger population of nursing students in Thailand?

Are there other potential factors influencing resilience that were not considered in this study?

How might cultural factors specific to Thailand influence the study's findings, and how could these be explored further?

How can the findings be practically implemented in nursing education programs to enhance resilience among students?

What specific interventions or programs could be developed based on the study's findings?

What are the key areas for future research that this study has identified?

How does the clinical education environment specifically impact resilience among nursing students?

Could the study explore the role of clinical mentors or the nature of clinical assignments in influencing resilience?

What steps were taken to ensure the validity and reliability of the scales in this specific cultural context? From your perspective, is the method used to carry out the cultural validation of the instruments sufficient?

Did you obtain authorization from the original authors of the scales to use them?

The fact that the data collection instruments have a total of 109 items, don't you think this could influence the answers?

Author Response

Response from authors to Reviewer 1   1. Summary
I extend my sincere appreciation for dedicating your valuable time to the thorough review of the manuscript. Enclosed are the comprehensive responses addressing your insightful comments and the pertinent corrections meticulously delineated in the re-submitted files. Your constructive feedback has significantly enriched the quality of the manuscript, and I am profoundly grateful for your scholarly input.
2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?	Yes	N/A
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Yes	N/A
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?	Can be improved	The method section has been revised following your suggestion.
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?	Yes	N/A
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?	Yes	N/A
Is the article adequately referenced? Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?	Yes Yes	N/A N/A
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Comments and Suggestions for Authors   Comments 1: First of all, I would like to congratulate the authors for submitting the manuscript. Response 1: Thank you very much for your kind words and congratulations. We appreciate your time and support in reviewing our manuscript. Your feedback is invaluable, and we are eager to incorporate your insights to enhance the quality of our work.   Comments 2: The manuscript titled "Factors Associated with Resilience among Thai Nursing Students in the Context of Clinical Education: A Cross-sectional Study" examines the relationship between nursing students' resilience and relevant variables in the context of clinical education. The study involved 319 undergraduate nursing students in Northeast Thailand and utilized various scales to measure resilience, social support, self-directed learning, and stress. The results indicated that social support and self-directed learning had a positive association with resilience, while stress had a negative association. The final model accounted for 43.4% of the variance in the resilience score. Response 2: We are pleased to hear that the study's objectives and methodology were clear to you. Your summary of the key findings accurately reflects the primary outcomes of our research. We are encouraged by the positive associations between social support and self-directed learning with resilience, as well as the identification of stress as a factor negatively impacting resilience. Comments 3: The study employs multiple regression analysis to identify factors associated with resilience, offering a comprehensive view of how different variables interact. The sample size is adequate, and the use of standardized scales for measurement ensures reliability. Response 3: We are pleased to hear that the use of multiple regression analysis to identify factors associated with resilience has been recognized as contributing to a comprehensive understanding of the interactions between different variables. Your validation of the adequacy of our sample size and the reliability ensured by the use of standardized scales for measurement is reassuring and aligns with our commitment to methodological rigor.   Comments 4: The multiple regression analysis is appropriately conducted, with the results indicating significant associations between resilience and the studied variables. The report of β values and confidence intervals enhances the transparency of the results. Response 4: We appreciate your acknowledgement of the appropriateness of the analysis and the significant associations found between resilience and the studied variables.   Comments 5: The interpretation of the results aligns well with the data presented. The authors correctly identify social support, self-directed learning, and stress as significant factors influencing resilience. Response 5: We are pleased you find the appropriate alignment between our interpretations and the presented data.   Comments 6: While the findings are relevant, they are specific to Thai nursing students, which may limit their applicability to other populations. The cross-sectional nature of the study also means that causality cannot be established. Response 6: We acknowledge the limitations you highlighted and would like to address these concerns. Regarding the applicability of our findings, we recognize that our study focuses on Thai nursing students, and the cultural and contextual factors may influence the generalizability of our results to other populations. We encourage future research to explore these factors in different populations to enhance the external validity of our findings.   Comments 7: The authors acknowledge the limitations of their study, including the use of convenience sampling and the potential for social desirability bias in responses. These limitations are important to consider when interpreting the results. Response 7: We agree that the use of convenience sampling and the potential for social desirability bias are important limitations to bear in mind when interpreting the results. In our revised manuscript, we will emphasize the impact of these limitations on the generalizability and robustness of our findings. Additionally, we will explore avenues to address these limitations in future research.
4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language
Point 1: Comments from reviewer regarding “Quality of English Language (x) I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper ( ) English very difficult to understand/incomprehensible ( ) Extensive editing of English language required ( ) Moderate editing of English language required ( ) Minor editing of English language required ( ) English language fine. No issues detected
Response 1: N/A
5. Additional clarifications

Questions from reviewer: To further improve the article, you could consider asking the following questions.

 

Reviewer: How representative is the sample of the larger population of nursing students in Thailand?

Author: Thank you for raising this important question about the representativeness of our sample. We acknowledge that the convenience sampling method may limit the generalizability of our findings to the larger population of nursing students in Thailand.

While random sampling would be ideal, it was not feasible within the context of our research due to limited resources and access to students across all six nursing colleges. Therefore, we chose a convenient sampling method within the Praboromrajchanok Institute due to access to specific research settings and collaboration with designated contact persons within each college.

Strengths:

The sample size (319) exceeds the a priori power calculation, increasing the reliability of our findings. Focus on recent clinical practice experiences ensures relevance to the research topic.

Sampling from three out of six colleges within the Institute broadens the scope compared to a single college.

Limitations:

Convenience sampling introduces potential bias, as volunteers may not be representative of the entire nursing students population. Limiting the study to the northeast region restricts generalizability to nursing students nationwide. Female and 20-24 age range dominance aligns with overall Thai nursing student demographics but limits understanding of diversity within the population.

While our findings may not directly apply to all Thai nursing students, they offer valuable insights into resilience among students within the Praboromrajchanok Institute and potentially in similar regional settings. For broader generalizability, we encourage future research to employ random sampling and include students from diverse colleges and regions.

 

Reviewer: Are there other potential factors influencing resilience that were not considered in this study?

Author: Thank you for raising this insightful question. Our study focused on three essential factors – social support, self-directed learning, and perceived stress – but resilience in nursing students is undoubtedly a complex phenomenon influenced by numerous other factors.

We think these are some potential additional factors:

Individual characteristics: Personality traits like optimism, adaptability, and emotional intelligence have been linked to resilience.

Academic resources: Availability of quality learning materials, supportive instructor, and effective teaching strategies can impact resilience.

While we couldn't explore all these factors within the scope of this study, we acknowledge their potential influence.

We are highlighting the need for future research.

We conducted qualitative research alongside our quantitative study, which provided deeper insights into individual experiences and potentially revealed other relevant factors.

We believe investigating these additional factors would significantly enrich our understanding of resilience in nursing students. We encourage future research to delve deeper into these areas and build upon our findings.

 

 

 

Reviewer: How might cultural factors specific to Thailand influence the study's findings, and how could these be explored further?

Author: Thank you for raising this critical point. Exploring the influence of specific Thai cultural factors on resilience among nursing students is crucial for understanding the nuances of our findings and guiding future research.

We think these are potential Thai cultural influences:

Collectivism: Thai culture emphasizes group harmony and interdependence. This could lead to more robust social support networks and a preference for seeking support within one's family or community, impacting the role of social support in resilience.

Respect for authority figures: Hierarchical relationships within Thai society might influence interactions with instructors and preceptors, impacting the effectiveness of self-directed learning and controlling stress levels.

Religious beliefs: Buddhism plays a significant role in Thai culture, emphasizing mindfulness and acceptance, which could contribute to resilience through coping mechanisms.

Family expectations and pressure: High expectations from the family to excel in education and contribute to family well-being could create additional stress and impact resilience.

We want to explore these factors further in future research:

Cross-cultural comparisons: Comparing similar studies with nursing students from different cultures could shed light on the specific influences of Thai culture on resilience.

Qualitative research focus: In-depth qualitative studies exploring students' lived experiences and cultural interpretations of resilience and its influencing factors could be valuable.

Mixed-methods approach: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the interplay between cultural factors and the identified resilience factors (social support, self-directed learning, and perceived stress).

We recognize the limitations of our study in fully capturing the complex ways Thai culture influences resilience. We encourage future research to delve deeper into these cultural nuances and contribute to a richer understanding of resilience among Thai nursing students.

 

 

Reviewer: How can the findings be practically implemented in nursing education programs to enhance resilience among students?

Author: Thank you for raising this crucial question. Translating our research findings into practical tools for enhancing student resilience in nursing education is essential for making a positive impact.

We think there are possible potential implementation strategies regarding our findings:

Self-directed learning

Active learning methods: Promote student engagement through problem-based learning, case studies, and simulations that encourage independent analysis and decision-making.

Metacognitive skills development: Teach students self-regulation, reflection, and critical thinking skills to enhance their learning autonomy and adaptability.

Personalized learning opportunities: Offer flexible learning environments, online resources, and mentorship programs to match individual learning styles and preferences.

Collaborative learning activities: Create opportunities for peer-to-peer learning and knowledge sharing, fostering collaborative problem-solving and support networks.

Social support

Peer support groups: Create safe spaces for students to vent, share experiences, and offer mutual interest and support.

Community building initiatives: Foster a sense of belonging and inclusivity within the nursing school through regular social events, activities, and clubs.

Perceived stress

Stress management training: Equip students with practical techniques for coping with stress, such as mindfulness, relaxation exercises, and time management strategies.

Promote healthy lifestyles: Encourage students to prioritize self-care practices like physical activity, healthy eating, and adequate sleep to enhance their overall well-being and stress resilience.

While these are potential implementation strategies, further research is needed to evaluate their effectiveness in enhancing student resilience. We encourage further research and collaboration to refine these strategies and develop evidence-based interventions for building resilience in future generations of nurses.

 

Reviewer: What specific interventions or programs could be developed based on the study's findings?

Author: Thank you for raising this key point. Identifying specific interventions based on our findings is crucial for translating research into tangible actions that enhance student resilience.

Focus on self-directed learning and social support: As they have given a strong association with resilience, we think there are potential interventions for promoting nursing students’ resilience as follows:

Metacognitive skills training: Train students in self-reflection, critical thinking, problem-solving, and goal-setting to empower them to take ownership of their learning.

Personalized learning modules: Develop online or blended learning modules with adaptable content, pace, and assessment strategies to suit individual learning styles and needs.

Clinical placement portfolios: Encourage nursing students to actively curate portfolios documenting their clinical experiences, reflections, and learning goals, promoting self-assessment and goal-directed learning.

Online support groups: Develop online platforms or apps where students can connect anonymously, share their experiences, and offer mutual encouragement.

These interventions are preliminary suggestions, and pilot testing with evaluation mechanisms is crucial. Consider collaborating with your nursing school to implement and evaluate these interventions on a smaller scale before broader adoption. By building self-directed learning skills, fostering social support networks, and addressing perceived stress, these interventions can contribute significantly to enhancing student resilience. We look forward to collaborating with colleagues in nursing education to refine and evaluate these interventions for maximum impact.

 

 

Reviewer: What are the key areas for future research that this study has identified?

Author: Thank you for raising this crucial point. Identifying critical areas for future research based on our findings allows us to build upon our knowledge and address remaining gaps in understanding resilience among Thai nursing students.

We want to highlight critical areas for future research:

Deeper exploration of self-directed learning, such as investigating specific pedagogical strategies that effectively promote self-directed learning in clinical settings and exploring the role of technology and online resources in supporting self-directed learning during clinical practice.

Understanding the dynamics of social support by looking into the types and sources of social support most beneficial for resilience in Thai nursing students, analyzing the effectiveness of specific interventions to build and strengthen social support networks within nursing programs and clinical settings, and exploring the role of cultural factors in shaping how Thai students seek and provide social support.

Based on our findings, these are critical areas for future research. We are committed to further exploring these areas and contributing to a deeper understanding of resilience among Thai nursing students. We aim to optimize clinical education and prepare future nurses for successful and fulfilling careers.

 

Reviewer: How does the clinical education environment specifically impact resilience among nursing students?

Author: Thank you for raising this crucial point. Understanding how the clinical education environment specifically impacts resilience in nursing students is vital for creating supportive learning environments and enhancing student well-being.

Self-directed learning: A positive clinical environment can foster self-directed learning through positive feedback and evaluation.

Social support: A supportive clinical environment can enhance social support by promoting positive peer relationships.

Perceived stress: A positive clinical environment can reduce perceived stress through promoting of work-life balance to ensure reasonable workloads, scheduling flexibility, and breaks in order to prevent burnout among nursing students.

 

Reviewer: Could the study explore the role of clinical mentors or the nature of clinical assignments in influencing resilience?

Author: Thank you for raising this insightful point. The role of clinical mentors and the nature of clinical assignments undoubtedly influence resilience in nursing students.

We have done another research project, a qualitative study, through focus group interviews with nursing instructors, which primarily sheds light on their experiences and perceptions of challenges and supports for student resilience.

We recognize the importance of exploring the role of clinical mentors and the nature of clinical assignments in shaping student resilience. Your suggestion has encouraged us to consider potential next steps in this area. Further research in this direction would significantly enhance our understanding of these influential factors and contribute to developing effective strategies for promoting resilience among nursing students during clinical practice.

 

Reviewer: What steps were taken to ensure the validity and reliability of the scales in this specific cultural context? From your perspective, is the method used to carry out the cultural validation of the instruments sufficient?

Author: Thank you for raising this insightful point. We employed a multi-step approach for cultural validation, including translation, back-translation, expert evaluation, and pilot testing with the target population. While further research could refine the validation, this process ensured sufficient cultural equivalence and reliable measurement of the constructs within the Thai nursing context.

 

 

Reviewer: Did you obtain authorization from the original authors of the scales to use them?

Author: Regarding copyright and scholarly integrity, due acknowledgement and respect were accorded to the original authors of the scales. The Thai version of the CD-RISC was acquired directly from the creators, ensuring compliance with copyright regulations. Similarly, concerning the MSPSS, PRO-SDLS, and SINS scales, full credibility and attribution were duly granted to the original authors.

 

Reviewer: The fact that the data collection instruments have a total of 109 items, don't you think this could influence the answers?

Author: Thank you for raising the potential impact of instrument length. We agree that the length of the instrument is a valid concern.

We piloted the instrument with a smaller group to ensure participant fatigue didn't affect data quality. The instrument was divided into sections to maintain participant engagement and reduce burden.

 

 

We are grateful for your insightful feedback on our manuscript and have carefully considered your comments and suggestions. We have implemented revisions throughout the text to address your points and strengthen the overall quality of our work. You will find the changes highlighted in yellow for your convenience.

 

We are confident that the revised manuscript now better reflects your valuable feedback and would be pleased to receive your further consideration. Your comments motivate us to uphold the high standards of our research. If you have any specific suggestions for improvement or further clarification, we would be eager to address them to enhance the overall quality of our manuscript.

 

Thank you once again for your time and expertise.

 

Best regards,

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study is relevant to nursing education, although it does not offer much new information, as it corroborates previous studies. Even so, the methodology is well explained and the results make the discussion more robust. However, it would be good if the article explained more explicitly what it adds to what is already known.

Author Response

Response from authors to Reviewer 2   1. Summary
I extend my sincere appreciation for dedicating your valuable time to the thorough review of the manuscript. Enclosed are the comprehensive responses addressing your insightful comments and the pertinent corrections meticulously delineated in the re-submitted files. Your constructive feedback has significantly enriched the quality of the manuscript, and I am profoundly grateful for your scholarly input.
2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?	Yes	N/A
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Yes	N/A
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?	Yes	N/A
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?	Can be improved	We revised the discussion part following reviewer’s suggestions.
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?	Yes	N/A
Is the article adequately referenced? Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?	Yes Can be improved	N/A We revised the conclusion part following reviewer’s suggestions
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Comments and Suggestions for Authors   Comments 1: Although the study is relevant to nursing education, it does not offer much new information, as it corroborates previous studies. Even so, the methodology is well explained, and the results make the discussion more robust. However, it would be good if the article explained more explicitly what it adds to what is already known. Response 1: Thank you very much for your review. We appreciate your time and support in reviewing our manuscript. Your feedback is invaluable, and we are eager to incorporate your insights to enhance the quality of our work. We have revised some contexts regarding reviewer’s suggestions.
4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language
Point 1: Comments from reviewer regarding “Quality of English Language” ( ) I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper ( ) English very difficult to understand/incomprehensible ( ) Extensive editing of English language required ( ) Moderate editing of English language required ( ) Minor editing of English language required (x) English language fine. No issues detected
Response 1: N/A
5. Additional clarifications

N/A

 

 

We are grateful for your insightful feedback on our manuscript and have carefully considered your comments and suggestions. We have implemented revisions throughout the text to address your points and strengthen the overall quality of our work. You will find the changes highlighted in yellow for your convenience.

 

We are confident that the revised manuscript now better reflects your valuable feedback and would be pleased to receive your further consideration. Your comments motivate us to uphold the high standards of our research. If you have any specific suggestions for improvement or further clarification, we would be eager to address them to enhance the overall quality of our manuscript.

 

Thank you once again for your time and expertise.

 

Best regards,

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Editor,

I would like to express my gratitude for the opportunity to review the manuscript titled [Factors Associated with Resilience among Thai Nursing Students in the Context of Clinical Education: A Cross-sectional Study] submitted to [Education Sciences]. I commend the authors for selecting a topic that holds great potential interest for a wide readership and scholars in the field. The study has several strengths, but there are also areas that need improvement.

Advantages:

1. Clarity of Study Measures: The study measures were adequately described and clarified, contributing to the overall transparency and understanding of the research.

2. Up-to-Date References: The references provided in the manuscript are relatively up-to-date, enhancing the relevance and reliability of the literature review.

Disadvantages:

1. Inadequate Introduction (Literature Review): The introduction, particularly the literature review, is not sufficient in describing, modifying, and clarifying the study variables, namely resilience, social support, self-directed learning, and stress.

2. Unclear Research Design: The research design was not presented clearly, making it challenging for scholars to replicate the study in different contexts or with different samples. Providing more details on the research design would enhance the study's replicability.

3. Restructuring of Results Section: The results section needs restructuring to enhance readability and clarity for readers. A clearer presentation of the findings will facilitate a better understanding of the study's outcomes.

4. Insufficient Discussion Section: The discussion section could benefit from more in-depth analysis and exploration. The authors are encouraged to delve deeper into the implications of the results and relate them to existing literature.

5. Elaboration on Conclusions: The conclusions section needs further elaboration to provide readers with a clearer understanding of the key takeaways from the study. It should highlight the significance of the findings and their potential contributions to the field.

6. Formatting Issues in References Section: The references section suffers from formatting flaws, particularly in references 28, 31, 43, 47, and 48. There is a difference in the color of the font, especially in writing the journal title. It appears that the references may have been copied and pasted from the journal website, leading to inconsistencies in formatting.

In conclusion, while the paper has notable strengths, addressing the mentioned areas of improvement would enhance its overall quality. I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the peer-review process and look forward to seeing the revised version of the manuscript.

Sincerely,

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Only minor revisions and editing process will make the paper ready for publication.

Author Response

Response from authors to Reviewer 3   1. Summary
I extend my sincere appreciation for dedicating your valuable time to the thorough review of the manuscript. Enclosed are the comprehensive responses addressing your insightful comments and the pertinent corrections meticulously delineated in the re-submitted files. Your constructive feedback has significantly enriched the quality of the manuscript, and I am profoundly grateful for your scholarly input.
2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?	Can be improved	We revised the introduction part following the reviewer’s suggestions.
Are all the cited references relevant to the research?	Yes	N/A
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?	Can  be improved	We revised the method part following the reviewer’s suggestions.
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?	Yes	N/A
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?	Can be improved Can be improved	We revised the result part following the reviewer’s suggestions
Is the article adequately referenced?     Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?	Can be improved     Must be improved	We modified the reference part following the reviewer’s suggestions We revised the conclusion part following the reviewer’s suggestions
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Comments and Suggestions for Authors   Comments 1: I would like to express my gratitude for the opportunity to review the manuscript titled [Factors Associated with Resilience among Thai Nursing Students in the Context of Clinical Education: A Cross-sectional Study] submitted to [Education Sciences]. I commend the authors for selecting a topic that holds great potential interest for a wide readership and scholars in the field. The study has several strengths, but there are also areas that need improvement. Response 1: Thank you very much for your review. We appreciate your time and support in reviewing our manuscript. Your feedback is invaluable, and we are eager to incorporate your insights to enhance the quality of our work. We have revised some contexts regarding the suggestions.
Comments 2: Clarity of Study Measures: The study measures were adequately described and clarified, contributing to the overall transparency and understanding of the research. Response 2: Thank you for noting the clarity of our study measures. We appreciate your recognition of our effort to ensure transparent and understandable research. If you have any further questions or suggestions regarding the study measures, we'd be happy to address them.   Comments 3: Up-to-Date References: The references provided in the manuscript are relatively up-to-date, enhancing the relevance and reliability of the literature review. Response 3: Thank you for recognizing the effort we put into incorporating recent research into our literature review. We agree that it's crucial to stay abreast of the latest developments in our field to ensure the relevance and reliability of our work.   Comments 4: Inadequate Introduction (Literature Review): The introduction, particularly the literature review, is not sufficient in describing, modifying, and clarifying the study variables, namely resilience, social support, self-directed learning, and stress. Response 4: Thank you for your feedback on the introduction and literature review. We appreciate you bringing this to our attention. We have revised the introduction and literature review to provide more in-depth explanations of resilience, social support, self-directed learning, and stress.   Comments 5: Unclear Research Design: The research design was not presented clearly, making it challenging for scholars to replicate the study in different contexts or with different samples. Providing more details on the research design would enhance the study's replicability. Response 5: Thank you for your feedback regarding the clarity of the research design. We agree that providing a more detailed and transparent research design is crucial for scholars to understand and potentially replicate our work in different contexts. We have revised the methodology section to provide a more comprehensive explanation of the research design. We are committed to improving the quality and replicability of our work and believe that addressing your concerns will significantly strengthen our research.   Comments 6: Restructuring of Results Section: The results section needs restructuring to enhance readability and clarity for readers. A clearer presentation of the findings will facilitate a better understanding of the study's outcomes. Response 6: Thank you for your feedback regarding the clarity of the results section. We appreciate you bringing this to our attention. We agree that enhancing the readability and presentation of our findings is crucial for better understanding the study's outcomes.We have revised the results section to be more reader-friendly and accessible.    Comments 7: Discussion Section: The discussion section could benefit from more in-depth analysis and exploration. The authors are encouraged to delve deeper into the implications of the results and relate them to existing literature. Response 7: We appreciate your feedback on our Discussion section and sincerely agree that further analysis and exploration would strengthen the manuscript. To address this, we have provided additional context in the discussion part.    Comments 8: Elaboration on Conclusions: The conclusions section needs further elaboration to provide readers with a clearer understanding of the key takeaways from the study. It should highlight the significance of the findings and their potential contributions to the field. Response 8: We appreciate your feedback on our conclusions section and recognize the importance of clearly summarizing the key takeaways and contributions of our work. We have revised to explicitly emphasize the key results of the study, ensuring they are presented in a clear and memorable way.   Comments 9: Formatting Issues in References Section: The references section suffers from formatting flaws, particularly in references 28, 31, 43, 47, and 48. There is a difference in the color of the font, especially in writing the journal title. It appears that the references may have been copied and pasted from the journal website, leading to inconsistencies in formatting. Response 9: We sincerely apologize for the formatting inconsistencies in the references section. You are correct that the inconsistencies likely stem from copying and pasting references from journal websites without thorough formatting checks. We have carefully reviewed your feedback and identified the specific font color issues in the mentioned references. We have ensured that all references adhere to the journal's referencing style guide, including consistent font color, journal title formatting, and other specified formatting requirements.   Comments 10: In conclusion, while the paper has notable strengths, addressing the mentioned areas of improvement would enhance its overall quality. I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the peer-review process and look forward to seeing the revised version of the manuscript. Response 10: We sincerely appreciate your insightful feedback and for taking the time to contribute to the peer-review process. Your comments are invaluable in helping us strengthen our manuscript." We fully agree that addressing the areas you outlined would significantly enhance the quality and impact of our work. We have revised them following your comments and we hope that the final manuscript will be significantly improved.
Comments from reviewer regarding “Quality of English Language ( ) I am not qualified to assess the quality of English in this paper ( ) English very difficult to understand/incomprehensible ( ) Extensive editing of English language required ( ) Moderate editing of English language required (x) Minor editing of English language required ( ) English language fine. No issues detected   Comments on the Quality of English Language Reviewer: Only minor revisions and editing process will make the paper ready for publication.
Authors: We have rechecked the English language.
5. Additional clarifications

N/A

 

 

We are grateful for your insightful feedback on our manuscript and have carefully considered your comments and suggestions. We have implemented revisions throughout the text to address your points and strengthen the overall quality of our work. You will find the changes highlighted in yellow for your convenience.

 

We are confident that the revised manuscript now better reflects your valuable feedback and would be pleased to receive your further consideration. Your comments motivate us to uphold the high standards of our research. If you have any specific suggestions for improvement or further clarification, we would be eager to address them to enhance the overall quality of our manuscript.

 

Thank you once again for your time and expertise.

 

Best regards,