Title: Effectiveness of Resilience Training Intervention on Psychological Capital of the
Underprivileged Widowed Women of Fasa City, Iran
Version: 1 Date: 08 Apr 2022
Reviewer's report:
This is a manuscript regarding the Effect of Resilience Training Intervention on Psychological
Capital of the Underprivileged Widowed women. The overall design is not clearly identified.
The presentation of the results focuses on statistical significance, to the exclusion of practical
or clinical significance. However, I have a few comments that I hope can help to make the
manuscript stronger:
Abstract:
When it appears that participants were randomized to the study groups?
Please, remove the terms for mean age of the women.
It is more informative to indicate the statistical tests used in the abstract.
Please clarify: there were no differences between the two groups at pretest; 2) there was
improvement in the outcomes from pretest to post-test within the intervention and no change in
the outcomes over time within the control group?
What is innovation this research? Please describe in the conclusion.
Background
In order to add clinical value to your study, it is vital to underline the role of prevention and
education especially in these women heads of households.
- The first 3 and 4 paragraphs could be summarized.
What are the differences of present study and previous studies?
What is your novel finding?
Method
Divide into subgroups for better understanding. I believe the clarity of this section could be
enhanced by subheadings.
Please clarify the research design. The term 'semi-experimental' is not usually used.
- It is not clear how the validity of your questioner has been performed.
Please clarify the characteristics of the women in cases where they appear to be in accordance
with or classification of centers, and how the adaptation is made. How to attract employees
and provide satisfaction, how to achieve the total number of employees in each group . Also
comment on the adequacy of the sample size obtained.
Indicate the response rate of this study.
Clarify the details of enrollment. Did you use an internet questionnaire? Was internet available
in most areas?
Justification for chi-square for demographic variables.
Study protocol may be submitted as a supplementary file.
Statements regarding data storage, accessibility/ availability may be included.
It is unclear if these pretest data were also considered the baseline for the intervention evaluation.
Result
The table numbers are Arabic or Persian!
Rewrite the title of the tables. It is vague and excessive. In addition to p value, need to report the
t, degrees of freedom, effect size for all analyses.  I believe the clarity of this section consider a
mixed anova that could show the interaction between time and condition?
Have you diagnosed the assumptions for your independent t- statistical test, paired t-test and
Chi-Square analyses?
In the tables, it is uncommon to report more than one decimal place. It causes confusion and
crowds.
Conclusions:
- This section is presented like a comparison with the results of other studies. You should rewrite
this section, showing the central message and idea researchers of your result study.