Chesak 2020.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: randomised controlled trial Study grouping: parallel group
Participants	Baseline characteristics Authentic Connections Groups Age (mean ± SD): NR Sex (N (% female)): NR Sample size: 18 Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR Control (no intervention) Age (mean ± SD): NR Sex (N (% female)): NR Sample size: 18 Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR Overall Age (mean ± SD): NR Sex (N (% female)): NR Sample size: 36 Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR Included criteria: inclusion criteria included being: (a) a nursing education specialist or clinical nurse specialist, and (b) a mother to at least one child or adult child. Excluded criteria: exclusion criteria included: (a) being actively suicidal or (b) meeting criteria for psychoses. Pretreatment: NR Compliance rate: 1/18 allocated to the intervention group dropped out. Session attendance rates among the intervention group averaged 92% across the study (not including the participant who dropped out) Response rate: NR Type of healthcare worker: exclusively nurses
Interventions	Intervention characteristics Authentic Connections Groups Type of the intervention: Intervention type 1 ‐ to focus one’s attention on the experience of stress Description of the intervention: The intervention sessions included facilitated discussions cantered on acknowledging and addressing the many stressors that professional mothers who are raising children face. The facilitators intentionally create a warm, accepting, and empathic environment that allowed participants to feel seen and heard for who they are at their core. The sessions were participatory in nature and de‐signed to be insight‐oriented in an effort to unobtrusively and respectfully guide participants towards discovering optimal solutions to shared work, parenting, and personal life issues. Examples of discussion topics include minimising rumination, assertiveness and mentorship at work, feelings of shame and self‐doubt, limit‐setting with children, and dealing with their pain. Participants were guided in methods to both tend to themselves and develop a support system, or “go‐to committee,” to pro‐vide them with ongoing support both during and after the sessions concluded The number of sessions: 12 Duration of each session on average: 1 hour Duration of the entire intervention: 12 weeks Duration of the entire intervention short vs long: Long Intervention deliverer: Researchers both of whom attended mentored training to prepare them to lead the intervention. The interventionists themselves are not just highly skilled professionals but also mothers themselves. Thus, each one of them resonated strongly, at a personal as well as professional level, with the issues to be addressed in the group sessions. Intervention form: Group of six participants Control (no intervention) Type of the intervention: no intervention Description of the intervention: participants in the control group were provided 1 hour per week of protected time reserved on their online work calendars for 12 weeks The number of sessions: 12 Duration of each session on average: 1 hour Duration of the entire intervention: 12 weeks Duration of the entire intervention short vs long: NR Intervention deliverer: NR Intervention form: NR
Outcomes	The Perceived Stress Scale Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome Maslach Burnout Inventory ‐ Emotional Exhaustion Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome Maslach Burnout Inventory ‐ Personal accomplishment (lack of) Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome Self‐Rating Depression Scale ‐ Depression Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome Self‐Rating Depression Scale ‐ Anxiety Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome
Identification	Sponsorship source: Funding Sources: Elizabeth C. Bonner Endowment Fund; Authentic Connections Country: USA Setting: Hospital Comments: NA Authors name: Sherry S. Chesak Institution: Department of Nursing, Division of Nursing Research, Mayo Clinic Email: chesak.sherry@mayo.edu Address: 200 First St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905 Time period: NR
Notes	PSS included in analysis 1.1 and 1.2 Self‐Rating Depression Scale ‐ Depression included in analysis 1.4 and 1.5
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "Participants who agreed and consented were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n = 18) or control group (n = 18)." Sequence generation process not mentioned
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "Participants who agreed and consented were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n = 18) or control group (n = 18). " Unable to judge whether participants and/or investigators could possibly foresee assignment
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	High risk	13/15 of the 18 participants (72%/83%) allocated to the intervention group completed respectively post‐intervention and 3‐month follow‐up assessment. 17/14 of the 18 participants (78%/94%) allocated to the intervention group completed respectively post‐intervention and 3‐month follow‐up assessment. Reasons not provided. Not mentioned whether lost to follow‐up at random.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No trial registration or study protocol reported, nor did we find one online
Other bias	Unclear risk	Not able to assess response rate. Authors mention that they have corrected for baseline differences. However, the baseline characteristics have not been reported.