.

No	Item	Guide questions/description	Response
Domain 1: Research team and reflexivity
Personal Characteristics
1.	Interviewer/facilitator	Which author/s conducted the interview or focus group?	LAM
2.	Credentials	What were the researcher's credentials? E.g. PhD, MD	N/A (Med Student)
3.	Occupation	What was their occupation at the time of the study?	Med Student
4.	Gender	Was the researcher male or female?	Female
5.	Experience and training	What experience or training did the researcher have?	LAM had previously conducted qualitative research, as part of a project funded by the NUI Galway School of Medicine and received further training in qualitative methodology for this particular role, including interviewing skills and thematic analysis by the senior researchers involved in the current study (i.e. SMH and the PI, CPD).
Relationship with participants
6.	Relationship established	Was a relationship established prior to study commencement?	None.
7.	Participant knowledge of the interviewer	What did the participants know about the researcher? e .g. personal goals, reasons for doing the research	In addition to information provided in the participant information sheets, a brief rationale for the research was also relayed prior to the interview proper.
8.	Interviewer characteristics	What characteristics were reported about the interviewer/facilitator? e.g. Bias, assumptions, reasons and interests in the research topic	Interviewer characteristics (e.g. biases, assumptions, interest, etc.) were not engaged prior to the interviews, so as to not bias participants’ accounts.
Domain 2: study design
Theoretical framework
9.	Methodological orientation and Theory	What methodological orientation was stated to underpin the study? e.g. grounded theory, discourse analysis, ethnography, phenomenology, content analysis	An inductive, interpretive qualitative approach via reflexive thematic analysis was used.
Participant selection
10.	Sampling	How were participants selected? e.g. purposive, convenience, consecutive, snowball	Purposive
11.	Method of approach	How were participants approached? e.g. face-to-face, telephone, mail, email	Zoom teleconferencing
12.	Sample size	How many participants were in the study?	10 completed
13.	Non-participation	How many people refused to participate or dropped out? Reasons?	1 dropped out due to scheduling.
Setting
14.	Setting of data collection	Where was the data collected? e .g. home, clinic, workplace	Workplace
15.	Presence of non-participants	Was anyone else present besides the participants and researchers?	Not during data collection/interviews
16.	Description of sample	What are the important characteristics of the sample? e.g. demographic data, date	That all participants were involved in the recruitment of participants fro RCTs
Data collection
17.	Interview guide	Were questions, prompts, guides provided by the authors? Was it pilot tested?	Questions, prompts, guides were provided by the authors and pilot-tested.
18.	Repeat interviews	Were repeat interviews carried out? If yes, how many?	No
19.	Audio/visual recording	Did the research use audio or visual recording to collect the data?	Yes
20.	Field notes	Were field notes made during and/or after the interview or focus group?	Yes
21.	Duration	What was the duration of the interviews or focus group?	28 mins (mean)
22.	Data saturation	Was data saturation discussed?	Yes
23.	Transcripts returned	Were transcripts returned to participants for comment and/or correction?	No
Domain 3: analysis and findings
Data analysis
24.	Number of data coders	How many data coders coded the data?	3
25.	Description of the coding tree	Did authors provide a description of the coding tree?	Yes.
26.	Derivation of themes	Were themes identified in advance or derived from the data?	Derived from data
27.	Software	What software, if applicable, was used to manage the data?	Microsoft Office
28.	Participant checking	Did participants provide feedback on the findings?	Yes, in Phase 2
Reporting
29.	Quotations presented	Were participant quotations presented to illustrate the themes / findings? Was each quotation identified? e .g. participant number	Yes
30.	Data and findings consistent	Was there consistency between the data presented and the findings?	Yes
31.	Clarity of major themes	Were major themes clearly presented in the findings?	Yes
32.	Clarity of minor themes	Is there a description of diverse cases or discussion of minor themes?	Yes