44 Chapter 2 specific teams or professional backgrounds. All steps were regularly presented to the research team, leading to adaptations. Only with consensus among the whole team we continued the process. In-between analyses were independently reviewed by the senior researchers to increase the reliability of our analyses by this triangulation of researchers. After final modifications, all involved researchers approved the categorization and naming within the mind map. Table 1. Overview of ‘organizational levels’ of DCIA prison locations Organizational levels Prisoners Prison employees Supervisors of prison employees Management team of one prison National headquarters of DCIA, at the Ministery of Justice and Safety External contacts and visitors of prisoners Research ethics The Medical Ethics Review Committee of the Amsterdam UMC declared a full ethical review was not necessary for this research. Permission for the research was given by the DCIA at the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security. Involved researchers signed a DCIA confidentiality agreement. Before participating, participants received information about the research project. All evaluation forms stated participation was voluntary, could be discontinued at any moment without specifying reasons, and emphasized the confidential use of the information by the researchers. All MCD participants and MCD facilitators gave informed consent by using these evaluation forms. The evaluation forms of MCD participants were collected anonymously. We also collected information about the date and location of the session and the professional discipline of MCD participants.