Reviewer Comment (Introduction/Literature Review)
1. Explain implication for mother burnout in views of positive and negative implication. Add on LR.
2. Need to elaborate comprehensive such as issues, gap, LR, importance of the study, problem statement.
3. Add a literature review section with an adequate number of references.
4. Include a section that clarifies the conceptual/theoretical framework.
Author’s Response/Changes: Additional information was added related to previous findings and gaps in research on parental burnout of working mothers through an extensive literature review, with an adequate number of references.
Reviewer Comment (Methods/Study Design)
1. Research Design: Describes structure of the study, framework of research methods, and techniques chosen by a researcher to conduct a study. Mentioning “observational epidemiologic study designed” in this study. Must be specific such as Example: cross-sectional design, cohort study
Author’s Response/Changes: Included information related to study design, survey administration, and data collection.
2. Participants: Provides details about the individuals or entities involved in the study. This includes information about the sample size, sampling method, and rearrange for inclusion or exclusion criteria in this article.
Author’s Response/Changes: Additional information was included to explain how participants were recruited and details were given to clarify criteria for inclusion and exclusion.
3. Instruments: Describes the instruments “online Qualtrics survey” used to collect data. The content of the instrument.
Author’s Response/Changes: Survey instrument was further explained with what types of questions were included and the type of data collected.
4. Procedure and data collection: study conducted in two phases. provides a clear and detailed of how the study was conducted. Explain first phase and second phase. Explain comprehensively in data collection. Really couldn’t understand.
Author’s Response/Changes: Clarified why an IRB amendment was made and the necessity of an additional wave of recruitment was needed
5. Explain the sample calculation from this study. Left of 272 was it sufficient from sample calculation.
Author’s Response/Changes: Provided details related to 80% power calculation.
Reviewer Comment (Data Analysis/Results)
1. Write the data analysis/results sections in more detail.
Author’s Response/Changes: Results section was expanded upon in greater detail.
2. Rearrange all the figures.
Author’s Response/Changes: Figures remained in same order but were updated to include additional information. Additional figures were added for clarification and to provide more context for results
3. Explanation is not pertaining to figure. Confusing. No figure 3 and 4 in explanation to refer. It just a statement and most of the descriptive, percentage was not total of 100%.
Author’s Response/Changes: Tables are now referred to within the results section and all categories with n and % are included in written description of results.
4. Better to put n after % such as 86%(150)
Author’s Response/Changes: Explanations of results include both n and % now.
5. Explanation according to figure is much better. Suggest to put table for demographic data and explain.
Author’s Response/Changes: Demographic table included.
6. As an example for this: “For the survey, researchers found that approximately 33% of the study participants had 1 child while 47% of the participants had 2 kids.” Total was not 100%. No figure or table to refer.
Author’s Response/Changes: Table was included for reference, and all categories with n and % are included in written description of results.
7. Please check result on t-test which stated in the study was ‘The results from the t-test were significant for this question, but in figure 5 the result was not significant as a p-value > 0.01.
Author’s Response/Changes: Table 5 is organized to make t-test and p-value clearer.
Reviewer Comment (Discussion)
Support the discussion with evidence from the literature
1.The discussion section researchers was not interpret and analyze the findings, researcher should discuss comprehensive pertaining to the issue as mention in abstract (social pressures impacting working mothers, who is inflicting social pressures, and what areas of their life are being impacted). Researcher should summarise the result in relation to each stated research objective. Relate the finding back to the literature and do the results reported by other researcher. Discuss the implications. Include the public health implication in discussion too.
Author’s Response/Changes: The discussion section was rewritten to synthesize current results with relevant findings from recent literature and answer the research questions laid out in the abstract/introduction. Strengths and limitations were addressed. Specific section related to public health implications included in discussion.
Reviewer Comment (Conclusion)
1. Add a conclusion section that summarizes the paper and the findings.
Author’s Response/Changes: Conclusion section added.
Reviewer Comment (References)
1.Insufficient of references. Most common 15 references and above
2. Kindly check the references format. Please follow the guidelines in writing reference such as APA style.
Author’s Response/Changes:
Additional references added with inclusion of literature review.
References updated to meet APA 7th edition criteria.