What Do Palliative Care Professionals Understand as Spiritual Care? Findings from an EAPC Survey
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Lines 18 - 19: Use another definition than "specialist input" so it will gauge interest among researchers even from different areas.
Line 20: Replace "before death" and "during bereavement" with another classification, more elucidative to researchers.
Line 52: "BV, MTGBM, TY" weren't previously defined and got weird in the context.
Lines 758-759: This paragraph is very concise and usefull for researchers, if transferred to the Abstract.
Lines 790-805: These details gauge interest on the research, and are very elucidative if mentioned in the Abstract.
Line 822: Relevant information to include in the Abstract, enhancing the quality of the description of the research.
Author Response
Many thanks for these thoughtful comments. We have formatted them as italics, and respond to each in turn below.
Lines 18 - 19: Use another definition than "specialist input" so it will gauge interest among researchers even from different areas.
We aren’t entirely sure what the reviewer would want here. There are limited words available for the Abstract, and this particular text is part of a summary of the content of the sixth theme, which was staff roles, which included comments from participants on the roles and input from specialists. We have now added a little more text to expand this, and rephrased as follows (now lines 22-3, further to additional changes to the Abstract): …staff roles and responsibilities, including specific input from specialist providers.
Line 20: Replace "before death" and "during bereavement" with another classification, more elucidative to researchers.
As noted above, we were restricted by word count, so the text here was succinct, which we realise was not as clear as it might have been. We have now revised this section of text by adding some more words to improve clarity, as follows (now (further to additional changes to the Abstract) lines 23-4): families before patients’ deaths, families during bereavement
Line 52: "BV, MTGBM, TY" weren't previously defined and got weird in the context.
Apologies; the paper was blinded for peer review, and we missed this inclusion of our initials in the body of the text. Their meaning will be clear in the unblinded paper.
Lines 758-759: This paragraph is very concise and useful for researchers, if transferred to the Abstract.
Lines 790-805: These details gauge interest on the research, and are very elucidative if mentioned in the Abstract.
Line 822: Relevant information to include in the Abstract, enhancing the quality of the description of the research
Thank you for these suggestions for detail from the text which might be included in the Abstract, and we agree. As noted above, there are limited words available for the Abstract. However, subject to the agreement of the editor, we have now amended this in places as suggested, with additional text as follows:
Line 13: we have inserted: from 67 countries and most regions of the world
Lines 18-21: we have deleted the following two brief phrases “attitudes towards” and “including providing specific elements of care”, and replaced with the following: interactions between staff and patients, one theme being the nature or quality of care provided by staff, and the other four specific content of that care: supporting patients’ wellbeing, supporting patients’ religious faiths, facilitating reflection, and enabling focused discussions
Reviewer 2 Report
The research results are well presented.
But the results of this research have been expressed as shown in other research.
There was no analysis or new explanation. As it seemed, it was like the results of past research, which are only mentioned in the discussion section.
A review of papers and research seems to be necessary. If you look at the references, you will see only a few from recent years (just 4). It is suggested to review the literature again to analyze and explain the results.
Author Response
Thank you for your kind comment on our presentation of our results. We realise that our survey findings are not unique, but this survey is the broadest and most international survey of all studies that we have been able to find, and is therefore important not so much for any new insight it might provide, but more for identifying and confirming what appears to be a growing consensus on what comprises spiritual care. Many recent studies, as we note in our paper, continue to be small scale qualitative studies, which cannot be the basis for any general conclusions. One of the four recent papers we cite which the reviewer mentions is a systematic review from 2020 (Batstone et al, 2020), which is a comprehensive recent summary of studies in this field in recent years. We have however now added some additional references, including another recent systematic review (Ghorbani et al. 2021), and also added further text to our paper, some additional text and citations in the Introduction (across lines 50-58), and additional paragraphs in the Discussion, from line 800; changes tracked. In this additional text we expand on the relationship between our findings and further specific recent published studies addressing our major themes, including Taylor 2021, Morland et al. 2022, Vigna et al 2022, and also a sample of recent papers which discuss topics related to our minor themes. We were initially concerned not to make the paper over-long, but we hope that, if the reviewer is happy with our revisions, the editor will find these few additional paragraphs and additional references acceptable.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
It is currently suitable for printing
