Bridging Barriers to Evidence-Based Practice and Knowledge Utilisation: Leadership Strategies in Acute Care Nursing
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for the opportunity to review this paper; the study addresses an important and timely topic that contributes valuable insights to the field.
1. Page 6, line 205-244: I suggest removing the details about Braun and Clarke's six-phase thematic analysis framework from the main text. However, if the authors or editors prefer to retain this information, I recommend presenting the six phases in a separate box for clarity and better readability.
2. Line 322, 342- is NMs= nurse managers? Please be consistent with the term used for ward managers.
3. Table 4: Including example quotes for each free code would be helpful in strengthening the data reporting and providing greater context for the findings.
4. Points 3.1.3 and 3.2 appear to be redundant. I suggest consolidating the ideas to avoid repetition and improve the clarity and flow of the text.
5. The results section could be enhanced by explicitly summarizing the barriers and enablers in a clear and concise table or figure.
6. I could not locate the article listed as reference 5: Ominyi JU, Ezurigbo BN. "The impact of leadership on evidence-based nursing practice: barriers and facilitators." Br J Nurs. 2019;28(3):165-169. Could you clarify how this paper differs from the current manuscript?
Author Response
Please see in the attached
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for permitting me the opportunity to review this original research exploring barriers to EBP and knowledge utilization, specifically within our leadership teams. This manuscript provides a valuable contribution to the literature as it provides insights into how leaders provide support and resources to staff for implementation of evidence into practice. The use of interviews, observations, and records to determine themes associated with EBP implementation barriers is a noted strength in this study. The interpretation of the qualitative themes is comprehensive and appropriate. Use of tables is appropriate and enhances the understanding of the text provided. The discussion section is well written and clearly articulates the similarities, and differences, found in existing literature. All references are appropriate for the literature review and discussion.
I have 2 areas for revision consideration:
1. The manuscript uses nurse manager abbreviations of NM and WM interchangeably throughout its entirety. I suggest using only 1 abbreviation as it is confusing for the reader.
2. Lines 158-173 are repetitive across the 2 paragraphs. Please consolidate as the duplication is not necessary.
Again, thank you for this contribution.
Author Response
Please see in the attached
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
