Alexander 2015.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: randomised controlled trial Study grouping: parallel group
Participants	Baseline characteristics Yoga Age (mean ± SD): NR Sex (N (% female)): NR Sample size: 20 Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR Control (No intervention) Age (mean ± SD): NR Sex (N (% female)): NR Sample size: 20 Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR Overall Age (mean ± SD): 46.38 ± 10.23 Sex (N (% female)): 39 (98%) Sample size: 40 Years of experience (mean ± SD): 14.21 ± 11.02 Included criteria: no prior experience with yoga, willingness to complete eight weekly sessions and homework exercises, and willingness to be randomly assigned to the research or control group.  Excluded criteria: serious illness or major orthopaedic diagnoses of the neck, back, pelvis, or lower extremities that could interfere with completion of the yoga intervention protocol. Pretreatment: NR Compliance rate: NR Response rate: NR Type of healthcare worker: exclusively nurses
Interventions	Intervention characteristics Yoga Type of the intervention: Intervention type 2 ‐ to focus one’s attention away from the experience of stress Description of the intervention: In early yoga sessions, participants learned to become conscious of their breathing. Breathing is both a conscious and unconscious process and therefore gives conscious access to the autonomic nervous system. Inhalation stimulates the sympathetic nervous system, while exhalation stimulates the parasympathetic nervous system. When one inhales, heart rate increases and when one exhales, heart rate decreases. Practising mindful breathing allows individuals to calm the body and mind immediately, thereby decreasing stress or energising the nervous system if one feels fatigued or depressed (Burg & Michalak, 2011; Mason et al., 2013). Throughout the intervention, the instructor taught participants the basics of postural alignment, deep breathing, and monitoring the mind with simple meditations. Each session concluded with deep relaxation. Each participant received handouts for each session to provide further information and a visual reminder of the exercises, the basis for cultivating a home practice. As the series progressed, additional exercises, breathing practices, and meditations were added to expose participants to the wide range of movements that can work not only the skeletal muscles but also other body systems such as the internal organs, nervous system, circulation, and emotions. The number of sessions: eight Duration of each session on average: NR Duration of the entire intervention: eight weeks Duration of the entire intervention short vs long: Short Intervention deliverer: Experienced yoga instructor, who is an osteopathic physician in the local community Intervention form: Group Control (no intervention) Type of the intervention: NA Description of the intervention: NA The number of sessions: NA Duration of each session on average: NA Duration of the entire intervention: NA Duration of the entire intervention short vs long: NA Intervention deliverer: NA Intervention form: NA
Outcomes	MBI Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome Health Promoting Lifestyle Profile II (HPLP II) Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome
Identification	Sponsorship source: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the Research and Creative Activities Fund of Texas Christian University. Country: USA Setting: Hospital Comments: NR Authors name: Gina K. Alexander Institution: Texas Christian University, Harris College of Nursing and Health Sciences Email: g.alexander@tcu.edu Address: TCU Box 298620, Fort Worth, TX 76129, USA Time period: NR
Notes	MBI‐EE included in analysis 2.1
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Questionnaire, and core study questionnaires. After individuals completed consent forms and baseline assessments, they were enroled in the study and randomized to the intervention (yoga) or usual care control group. A total of 54 individuals Sequence generation process not mentioned
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to understand whether intervention allocations could have been foreseen in advance of, during, enrolment.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Participants were not blinded.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Participants were not blinded whereas outcomes are self‐reported
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No trial registration or study protocol reported in the study and we did not find one online. No indication of selective reporting.
Other bias	Unclear risk	Compliance rate and response rate not reported.