Retrospective power calculations are bad!!!

How did you decide on your original sample size?

MTFU.

More seriously, every paper should be rejected!
If it is accepted first time, there is a risk that you have under-sold yourself and you should have submitted somewhere better first time.
Just revise (based on comments you have) and re-submit elsewhere.

I think the key question here is whether it will actually be effective.

Depending on the set-up (e.g. if they get to miss class to participate), an incentive may not even be needed.

Decent refreshments can often be very effective!!

If you don't have an idea of sample size at the outset, how will you know research question is answerable??

There was a similar question the other day.

PhD by publication is a route to a PhD for people who already have publication (a form of accreditation by prior learning).

What do you mean by 'reasonable impact'? Qualitative research with that number of participants does not usually get anywhere decent!!

Discussion should discuss your results in the context of other research.

You shouldn't introduce new data- if it wasn't important to go in results, why is it in discussion?

Surely the reason for requiring a PhD for posts is that it provides evidence of achieving key skills. A DProf does not necessarily give you those skills. I wouldn't shortlist a DProf if criteria was PhD unless really desperate to fill post.

PhD by published work requires 5-6 publications of a decent standard with a coherent theme. They are targetted at people who already have publications- i.e. Essentionally a form of accreditation of prior learning.

BTW- you will not be competitive for an NIHR doctoral fellowship with that publication record!

No one is going to know..... But why take the risk as theoretically the thesis you officially submit is not the one that was examined.

Also- if its been examined and acceptable, what is the point paying for proof-reading?

No requirement for a PhD supervisor to have a PhD at most universities.

So, its not a problem!

You shouldn't make any changes once corrections have been accepted.

I don't think there is much point contacting the editor- in this situation, they could have gone with rejection or revision. They have decided to go with revision and decided not to invite a third reviewer. They are obviously happy that it may be suitable for publication.

I would respond point-by-point- do not ignore anything, even if you just put 'thank you for this comment.'

BTW- if your paper is not rejected, it has obviously been pitched too low!

Based on your writing above and assuming dissertation is in English...

I would suggest that either your writing is so bad to be worthy of the award or your supervisor is right!

In terms of questioning, was this a viva? In which case, it forms part of the requirements of the award.