Table 3.

Actions taken to meet Yardley's quality criteria for qualitative research.

Quality criterion	Actions taken
Sensitivity to context	Sensitivity to Meaning in Life theoretical discourses was developed. Sufficient contextual detail (for the extracts, participants, researchers, and the study) was provided. The lead author DOK practiced and refined his interview skills with a service user prior to data collection commencing in order to ensure interviews were conducted in a manner sensitive to participants' context (exhibiting empathy, putting interviewees at ease, being aware of power asymmetries).
Commitment and rigour	The lead author demonstrated commitment by: persevering in participant recruitment; actively engaging in academic supervision; and realising the skills necessary to conduct Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (through attending workshops from experts). All themes, interpretations, and evidence used to support claims were revised, clarified, and finalised following critique by AH and BK at frequent academic supervision meetings. All authors engaged in personal reflexivity (reflecting on how we affected, and were affected by, the research process) and epistemological reflexivity (reflecting on how the assumptions about the world and knowledge made in the research process impacted findings). Analysis transcended the study interview guide; balanced phenomenological detail with interpretation; and focused on the meaning participants made of experiences rather than what happened to them. The analytic and reflexive aspects of the research process were carefully attended to, findings pitched appropriately, and theory sufficiently engaged with in making sense of the analysis.
Transparency and coherence	Study procedures were clarified to demonstrate how findings were arrived at. A sufficient sample of extracts was used so interpretations presented could be judged a reasonable representation of participants' accounts. All claims made were referenced to data and extracts were never allowed to speak for themselves. A detailed reflexivity statement was offered. Coherence was pursued through careful writing, flagging arguments for the reader, and revising work to address academic critique. Congruence between the study's aim, theoretical assumptions, and data collection/analysis methods was ensured.
Impact and importance	Findings open up new ways of comprehending Meaning in Life in the context of recovery in psychosis. Concrete recommendations for education, clinical practice, policy, and future research were made. The study focused on an aspect of mental health recovery prioritised by service users (Meaning in Life). The perspectives of an under-researched group were represented in order to promote their interests, offer them an opportunity to shape service developments, and draw attention to aspects of their care/treatment that might otherwise remain hidden.