Determinants of Sexual Abuse Prevention Knowledge among Children’s Schools in West Java Indonesia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review this manuscript. I read it with interest. I have the following comments and recommendations that may improve the manuscript. 

The paper now draws on previous research from around the world and attempts to draw similarities with Indonesia. For example, most respondents did not get information on the prevention of sexual abuse, including parents and teachers. Thus, the submission could be further enhanced if the authors could draw on an example/s of where similar difficulties have been faced and challenged or overcome and offer strategies moving forward or if the authors could provide steps toward change after identifying challenges found in this research.

However, with these minor revisions, I recommend the paper for acceptance.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 1,

I have revised my manuscript as you suggested. Here is I sent the results of the revised (in red). Please see the attachment. Thank you very much

 

Warm regards

Tetti solehati

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Please see attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 2,

I have revised my manuscript as you suggested. Here is I sent the results of the revised (in red). Please see the attachment. Thank you very much

 

Warm regards

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

 

Review for Determinants of Sexual Abuse Prevention Knowledge among 2 Children Schools in West Java Indonesia: A Cross-Sectional Study R1 (Second Review) (Socsci-1766913)

 

This manuscript presents the CSA knowledge scores of a sample of children and associations between this and the source of their CSA education (i.e. parents, teachers).

 

I still think there are some problems with the measure used. For example, scoring 0 for not disclosing to teachers (item 4) when children may have endorsed parents (item 3). Despite reassurance from the authors that parents and teachers were not separated, this does seem to be the case (items 3 and 4). The relevance of items about “unknown people” is also an issue. Furthermore, the measure does not seem to be solely a knowledge measure as it is also measuring intentions (such as who the child would disclose to) and self-efficacy (“courage”). I am concerned that a child who does not feel confident to disclose or who does not feel they can disclosure to either their parents or teachers would be deducted 3 points (42%), despite none of these measuring the child’s CSA knowledge. Also, we are not told how the information source item(s) is asked in the ‘Date Collection Tool’ section. We need to know the wording and structure for these items. As I mentioned in the last review, just asking children if they had been told about “sexual abuse” may not be an accurate measure as lots of research to suggest this may not involve comprehensive and accurate messages.

 

It is still the case that the authors did not engage with enough current, relevant research on CSA prevention attempts, CSA knowledge in children, or CSA prevention education. For example, there is an updated replication of Gibson and Leitenberg; research on parent-child CSA education is lacking; research on sexual health is mentioned rather than CSA; research on knowledge (in children and parents) and its relation to prevention.

 

Furthermore, the authors equate education with prevention which is an overstretch of their findings and not consistent with the literature.

 

Specific Comments

 

Page 2

“If the child knows the prevention of CSA, they will avoid the risk of sexual abuse.”

This needs to be supported with research. We have information that child education can increase child knowledge, but that is not the same thing as preventing sexual abuse.  The Finkelhor study that is cited here actually found that education was not associated with less sexual victimisation. On the balance of evidence (eg Ko and Cosden, Finkelor et al 2014, Rudolph et al., 2022, Pelcovitz et al), the available retrospective reports suggest that CSA education is not associated with less sexual abuse.

 

“subsequently experienced sexual abuse (Gibson, Leitenberg, & Neglect, 2000).”

There is a more recent study.

 

“This is due to several things, such as the lack of communication of the CSA prevention program from the government to the community, taboos on discussing sexual matters (Murray et al., 2014), and children (Lalor & McElvaney, 2010; Murray et al., 2014; Wismayanti et al., 2019; Xie et al., 2016).

This sentence does not seem to be finished.

 

“Based on those studies, many parents lack of basic knowledge about CSA”

This is an inference. It needs to be backed up with research on parental knowledge. A few studies present conflicting evidence, that parents are quite well-informed, for example, Alzoubi et al., (2017) state: “The study reveals that the majority of mothers are generally knowledgeable about CSA”. Or Rudolph & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2018. Furthermore, Rudolph et al., found that parental knowledge was not associated with parents educating their children.

 

Page 3

“Thus, children need to be equipped with sufficient knowledge of how to prevent CSA.”

As above, we don’t know that equipping children with knowledge will prevent CSA.

 

Page 4

Problems with the measure:

 

The description of the tool is missing how children were asked about information sources/education. Should this be section C)? The authors need to describe the items asking about this. Were children asked about the content of the education they received?

 

3) talk to parents or teachers if someone abuses the children; 4) talk to teachers if someone abuses the children;

Is this asking if the child would talk to these people if something inappropriate happened? So it is measuring intentions?

 

4) talk to teachers if someone abuses the children

Does this score 0 even if the child endorsed the previous question about parents?

 

5) who to tell if an unknown person attempts to force the children

Is this the same as items 3 and 4 which are asking who the child would tell?

 

7) the courage of children to tell their parents or teachers if someone is forcing them to do sexual abuse.

Could you explain this please.  Do you mean the likelihood? Their confidence?

 

5) who to tell if an unknown person attempts to force the children; 6) who to tell if an unknown person attempts to hug the children

Could you explain why you asked about ‘unknown person’ here when the majority of sexual abuse is perpetrated by known people and family members.

 

“Of the 378 letters sent to students' parents, only one disagreed”

So, of 378 letters sent out, 378 responses were received the following day?

 

Page 7

“sources toward CSA prevention among students”

I disagree with the authors on this point. We cannot say that education is prevention, because we don’t have the research to back this up. What the authors are talking about in this paper is education.

 

“Many participants had insufficient knowledge, which caused them to be at risk for CSA.”

This is an overstretch of the results.

 

“Adequate knowledge of sexual abuse prevention is necessary for children to protect them selves from the crimes committed by others.”

Reference required.

 

“low and inaccurate levels of sexual health knowledge cause vulnerability to sexual risk behavior patterns”

Is this referring to adolescent sexual risk taking?

 

“Sexual health interventions learned culturally and contextually were required early for the child.”

Reference required.

Do you mean CSA education of sexual health education?

 

“This situation showed that many children were still not getting information about sexual health in preventing sexual abuse in children. It makes the child vulnerable to sex-ual abuse whereby the number of incidents is increasing”

Reference needed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I have revised my manuscript based on your suggest.  Here with I attached my final correction. Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.