A Qualitative Study to Explore the Life Experiences of Older Adults in Oman
, Zahir Badar Al-Ghusaini 2, Maram Qasim Al-Nabhani 1, Abdulaziz Al-Mahrezi 3, Yaqoub Al-Saidi 1, Hamed Al-Sinawi 4, Ahmed Mohammed Al-Harrasi 4 and Moon Fai Chan 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
thank you for opportunity to review you research.
Topic is very interesting and very important nowadays. Research design is very well organized.
I have some suggestions:
In Introduction - please provide more information about elderly in Oman (eg. QoL) - some date that can be interesting audience.
please provide in Participants section age range
Good luck!
Author Response
Reviewer 1:
Additional Questions:
thank you for opportunity to review you research. Topic is very interesting and very important nowadays. Research design is very well organized.
Response: Thank you for your great support.
I have some suggestions:
1) In Introduction - please provide more information about elderly in Oman (eg. QoL) - some date that can be interesting audience.
Response: Added in the Introduction section where highlights in yellow.
2) please provide in Participants section age range.
Response: Age range was provided in 2.1. The Study Participants section is highlighted in yellow.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
It is a pleasure to review this manuscript of a qualitative study aiming to understand the life experiences of elderly people in Oman. The authors interviewed 13 senior citizens in Oman and asked about their life experiences in four life stages. The authors summarized the stories of resilience, relationships, social connections, and life reflections of the interviewees. This study provided invaluable life stories and wisdom of the senior citizens of Oman, many of the quotes are moving and inspiring. I have some comments regarding the manuscript.
1. "Life stories" or "life experiences" is a general term and there could be a long list of themes that could be incorporated into this theme. It would be helpful to guide the readers if the authors could provide more concrete theories to give rationals of how they came with the themes and questions they used for the interviews.
2. Do authors have any hypotheses or aims in this study, I feel this part is not very clear. In the conclusion, the authors stated that the stories shared by the interviewees could provide knowledge for future policymaking, however, this claim is somehow vague. I think the manuscript could provide more insights if the authors could connect their qualitative findings and implications more closely.
3. It would be helpful if the authors could elaborate how they came up with the interview questions. Were those questions based on any theories or previous studies? What was the process of designing the interview questions? Did the authors conducted any procedures to ensure the interview questions were valid?
4. I think the authors could do more contrast and comparisons between individuals with different social backgrounds. For example, females and males could respond differently to certain questions.
5. The authors mentioned that the purpose of this study is to explore solutions to improve senior people's quality of life and well-being. However, I think the authors could be more clear about the connection between the interview response and one's quality of life and well-being.
Author Response
Thank you for your comments and support. We addressed all the comments and revised the manuscript to make it clear. We look forward to further comments from your side.
1. "Life stories" or "life experiences" is a general term and there could be a long list of themes that could be incorporated into this theme. It would be helpful to guide the readers if the authors could provide more concrete theories to give rationals of how they came with the themes and questions they used for the interviews.
Response: Thank you for your comments. We included the theoretical elements based on Eriskson's theory [6] and Butler's theory [7]. We described these two theories in the second paragraph of the Introduction section, highlighted in yellow.
2.
2.1. Do authors have any hypotheses or aims in this study, I feel this part is not very clear.
Response: In a qualitative study, we will not set any hypothesis. The aim of this study was stated in the last sentences of the introduction section, highlighted in yellow.
2.2. In the conclusion, the authors stated that the stories shared by the interviewees could provide knowledge for future policymaking, however, this claim is somehow vague. I think the manuscript could provide more insights if the authors could connect their qualitative findings and implications more closely.
Response: Thank you for your comments. We agreed that these statements should not be in the conclusion. It should be a recommendation only. So, we decided to put it into 4.3. Recommendation before the conclusion to avoid confusion, highlighted in yellow.
3. It would be helpful if the authors could elaborate how they came up with the interview questions. Were those questions based on any theories or previous studies? What was the process of designing the interview questions? Did the authors conducted any procedures to ensure the interview questions were valid?
Response: The interview guide/semi-structured questions were adapted from a previous study similar to the life review by Chan [18]. It was also based on the theory developed by Erikson [6] and Butler [7]. In addition, we mentioned that a pilot study was conducted to ensure the procedures followed the protocol, including ensuring that the participants understood the meaning of the semi-structured questions. No discrepancy was found in this pilot study. It was illustrated in sections 2.2., and 2.4.2., highlighted in yellow.
4. I think the authors could do more contrast and comparisons between individuals with different social backgrounds. For example, females and males could respond differently to certain questions.
Response: Thank you for your comments. When we cross-checked the results, almost both male/and female older adults responded very similarly on each theme/sub-theme, so we did not separate gender for discussion.
5. The authors mentioned that the purpose of this study is to explore solutions to improve senior people's quality of life and well-being. However, I think the authors could be more clear about the connection between the interview response and one's quality of life and well-being.
Response: Thank you for your comments. For clarification, this study aims “to explore the life experiences of older Omani adults during their different life stages”. Those statements “explore solutions to … well-being.” stated in the conclusion are recommendations only. We put them into the recommendation section 4.3., before the conclusion to avoid confusion. Hope this re-arrangement is clear for the reviewer/readers.
Reviewer 3 Report
The article is highly relevant and usefull for future generations to learn from elder's life experiences. It is well executed, designed and reported. The research problem is properly formulated, and the aims are stated clearly. The research design is applicable, and the statistical methods are explained well. The conclusion is clear and reflects the aim of the study.
However, there is one area of concern, namely the small research group of 13 senoirs. If more participants were included the value of the study would be much higher.
There are also some minor corrections to be done:
1) Abstract: Please add some recommendations of your study. I am sure there are valuable recommendations to be made by the authors.
2) P.3. - Correct 2.4. . Procedures to 2.4. Procedures
3) P3.- Correct 2.4.1.. Socio - demographic to 2.4.1 Socio- demographic
4) P. 13. Add a heading with Recommendations to your article.
5) The following References are older than 5 years. Please update where possible:
3) Hall..(2016)
4) Chippendale ..(2013)
5) Haber..(2006)
6) Bohlmeijer..(2003)
7) Korte..(2012)
8) Pot..(2010)
9) Ando..(2010)
12) Pinquart..(2012)
13) Tomer..(2000)
16) Erikso ..(1950)
17) Butler..(1963)
18) Cha ..(2014)
19) Braun..(2006)
20) Bauger..(2016)
21) Lapsley..(1921)
24) Korotayev..(2015)
25) Shaya..(2017)
28) Van Wijngaarden..(2015)
7
2)
Author Response
The article is highly relevant and usefull for future generations to learn from elder's life experiences. It is well executed, designed and reported. The research problem is properly formulated, and the aims are stated clearly. The research design is applicable, and the statistical methods are explained well. The conclusion is clear and reflects the aim of the study.
Response: Thank you for your comments.
However, there is one area of concern, namely the small research group of 13 senoirs. If more participants were included the value of the study would be much higher.
Response:
We agreed that more samples could enhance the value of the study. However, in a qualitative study, Hennink and Kaiser (2022) concluded that data saturation is the cornerstone of rigor in determining sample sizes. In addition, their systematic review suggested that “… saturation can be achieved in a narrow range of interview (9-17)….” and our sample size is 13, which is between their recommendations.
Hennink M & Kaiser BN (2022) Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Social Science & Medicine. 292, 114523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523
There are also some minor corrections to be done:
1) Abstract: Please add some recommendations of your study. I am sure there are valuable recommendations to be made by the authors.
Response: Thank you for your comments. As suggested, we added it in the Abstract highlights in yellow.
2) P.3. - Correct 2.4. . Procedures to 2.4. Procedures
Response: Changed as suggested.
3) P3.- Correct 2.4.1.. Socio - demographic to 2.4.1 Socio- demographic
Response: Changed a suggested.
4) P. 13. Add a heading with Recommendations to your article.
Response: Add “4.3. Recommendation” highlights in yellow.
5) The following References are older than 5 years. Please update where possible:
Response: Updated as suggested, where highlighted in yellow in the reference. However, some references are unique, related theories or a book/chapter or protocol for us to use in our interview, so we cannot replace them.
References:
3) Hall..(2016). Updated to Hall et al., 2021[3].
4) Chippendale ..(2013). Replaced by Stuart 2022[4].
5) Haber..(2006). Can't replace it because this is an important study related to this area.
6) Bohlmeijer..(2003). Replaced by Xu et al., 2023, now is ref [8].
7) Korte..(2012). Replaced by Al Rashidi et al., 2022, now is ref [9].
8) Pot..(2010). Replaced by Saldivia et al., 2019, now is ref [10].
9) Ando..(2010). Replaced by Sales et al., 2022, now is ref [11].
12) Pinquart..(2012). Replaced by Shin et al., 2023, now is ref [14].
13) Tomer..(2000). Can't replace it because chapter of a book, now is ref [15].
16) Erikso ..(1950). Can't replace it because this theory supported the study, now is ref [6].
17) Butler..(1963). Can't replace it because this theory supported the study, now is ref [7].
18) Chan ..(2014). Can't replace it because we based on the interview guidelines from the study.
19) Braun..(2006). Can't replace it because we applied their analysis method on this study.
20) Bauger..(2016). Replaced by Sadeghmoghadam et al., 2020.
21) Lapsley..(1921). Replaced by Justo-Henriques et al., 2021.
24) Korotayev..(2015). Replaced by Assaad et al., 2020.
25) Shaya..(2017). Replaced by Lari et al., 2022.
28) Van Wijngaarden..(2015). Replaced by Larsson et al., 2023.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
Thanks for the hard work on the revisions. The manuscript has improved to incorporate the comments received from the reviewers. I have one suggestion for the manuscript. It is still unclear to me how the authors came up with the questions for the interviewees. I would expect the authors to elaborate more on how they created the list of questions and how did each question link to theoretical frameworks of human development or aging. After addressing this problem, I think the manuscript will be more holistic.
Author Response
Thanks for the hard work on the revisions. The manuscript has improved to incorporate the comments received from the reviewers.
Response: Thank you for your great support. We agreed there is room for improvement, especially in developing the semi-structured question. We added more information on the procedures for how we develop it. Please refer to below:
I have one suggestion for the manuscript. It is still unclear to me how the authors came up with the questions for the interviewees. I would expect the authors to elaborate more on how they created the list of questions and how each question link to theoretical frameworks of human development or aging. After addressing this problem, I think the manuscript will be more holistic.
Response: This study was based on the conceptual framework of Erikson [6] and Butler [7], which had four phases: childhood, adolescence, adulthood, and old age. The participants’ homes were the venues for the meetings. The participants had four meetings (one for each phase) of around 1 hour each. The semi-structured questions used in this study were adapted from a previous study conducted by Chan et al. [18], also one of the researchers of this study (MFC). He developed several questions on life-story review in a group of older adults in Singapore based on the theory developed by Erikson [6] and Butler [7]. The questions covered all phases. Researchers (ZBAG, BRAG) reviewed the questions for each phase to ensure that questions of each stage met the local context and were discussed with team members. Once the team agreed, questions were translated to Arabic from English, and another researcher back-translated them to English (RAAE). To ensure the meaning between both versions was consistent, it was confirmed by another researcher (MFC). A pilot study ensured that the older adults fully understood the questions. Hope the above explanations were clear and all were added in the section 2.4.2. In addition, we provided a few questions for each phase in the second paragraph of 2.4.2., to further elaborate, and all are highlighted in yellow.
