https://orcid.org/0009-0009-7319-7258
Dear editor
We welcome the comments provided by Lestari et al regarding our article and thank them. We would like to address these comments and provide further clarification.
As previously mentioned, our study utilized a cross-sectional design based on secondary data, employing a census sampling method. In the results section, in addition to presenting univariate analysis on the prevalence of hypertension and diabetes, we also conducted various comparisons between variables. These comparisons included examining the prevalence of hypertension in diabetics and non-diabetics, the prevalence of hypertension and diabetes separately among male and female patients and the prevalence of these conditions across different age groups. We also compared the prevalence of hypertension and diabetes in severely ill COVID-19 patients to the general population.
Regarding the use of inferential statistics, we would like to reiterate that our study employed a census sampling method. Therefore, inferential statistics, which are typically used to draw conclusions about a larger population based on a sample, were not utilized. Instead, we used descriptive statistics to provide a comprehensive summary of the data and gain insights into the characteristics of the studied population.
In scientific researches, it is generally recommended to avoid using the term “to prove” when discussing findings or conclusions. This is because science is a process of gathering evidence, analyzing data, and drawing conclusions based on the available evidence. Scientific research aims to provide support or evidence for a hypothesis or theory rather than definitively proving something beyond any doubt.
Lastly, we acknowledge the suggestion regarding including the degree of hypertension and type of diabetes in analyses. While we understand the potential value of analyzing these additional data, our study aimed to maintain simplicity by focusing on the variables mentioned. We thank Dovepress for providing a platform for the exchange of information.
Disclosure
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this communication.