Sexual Harassment Among Chinese Psychiatrists and Its Impact on Quality of Life: A Cross-Sectional Survey [Response to Letter]

This article responds to:

Response to “Sexual Harassment Among Chinese Psychiatrists and Its Impact on Quality of Life: A Cross-Sectional Survey” [Letter]

Dear editor

We greatly appreciate the interest shown by Yao et al in our research,¹ as well as the valuable comments and suggestions they have provided.² We also sincerely thank them for summarizing the advantages of our article.

First, Yao et al have provided a more concise sample size calculation formula, and have obtained the same result as our formula. We appreciate this and will consider using this formula in future studies. Second, as shown in Table 1, the bivariate analysis indicated that there may be no significant differences in working years and age (p > 0.05) between the group with sexual harassment (SH) and the group without SH. However, the subsequent multivariate logistic regression analysis results showed that the OR values corresponding to years of working and age were statistically significant (p < 0.05), indicating an association between years of working, age, and SH.^3,4 Specifically, an OR value less than 1 indicates that the older the age and the longer the years of working, the lower the possibility of experiencing SH. This difference may be due to the consideration of the interaction between multiple independent variables and the influence of other factors on the dependent variable in the multivariate logistic regression analysis. Therefore, these two results can complement each other to provide a deeper understanding. In other words, the bivariate analysis provides information about the differences between the two groups, while the multivariate logistic regression analysis reveals the specific relationship between the independent and dependent variables. We sincerely thank Yao et al for their careful observation and analysis of the statistical results, and we will consider and verify them in accordance with the journal’s policy. Third, we particularly appreciate the suggestion made by Yao et al that the prevalence of SH may vary among psychiatrists working in different departments, and future studies should consider the specific department where psychiatrists work. In addition, according to the opinions of Yao et al, future studies can include more abundant basic demographic characteristics and consider some modifiable psychosocial factors (such as psychological resilience), which is one of the limitations of our current study. Finally, we fully agree with the suggestion of Yao et al that since SH is also influenced by specific cultural and contextual factors, qualitative research can be considered in the future to further explore the individual patterns and risk factors of SH. In conclusion, we are very grateful for the recognition of the research advantages by Yao et al, and also appreciate the constructive feedback for improvement provided in the Letter to the Editor.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this communication.