↓ Skip to main content

How public health nurses’ deal with sexting among young people: a qualitative inquiry using the critical incident technique

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How public health nurses’ deal with sexting among young people: a qualitative inquiry using the critical incident technique
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5642-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Clark, Alison Lewis, Sally Bradshaw, Caroline Bradbury-Jones

Abstract

Globally, the potentially harmful effects of using cell phone technology for 'sexting' among young people, is a public health concern. The background literature indicates that sexting might have adverse psychosocial consequences for some young people who share partially nude images ('selfies'). Public health nurses (PHNs) could offer guidance to children and young people on digital safety, yet little is known about their role in this regard. This study explored PHNs' knowledge and confidence in addressing the issue among young people. A qualitative study was undertaken using the Critical Incident Technique. The study took place in 2016. Eighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with PHNs in a region of England. Data were analysed through thematic analysis, and managed through the use of NViVo 11 software. From the entire data set, thirteen critical incidents were identified of which nine were deemed relevant for reporting in this paper. PHNs regarded sexting as a contemporary 'normalised' practice that takes place in what young people consider to be trusting relationships. PHNs' knowledge was informed by media reports that supported their beliefs about young peoples' vulnerability to risk-taking sexual behaviour. They were not confident about discussing sexting with young people, even though some PHNs had done so in light of concerns about potential child sexual exploitation. PHNs have a role to play in advising young people on digital safety, but findings of the study show that their role is not fully realised. They have some knowledge of sexting as a possible signifier of abusive behaviour. However, they are not always confident in dealing with the issue. Improving PHNs ability to promote digital safety through better understanding of technology use among young people is good safeguarding practice. This may, in turn, better define this important nursing contribution to public health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 28 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 17%
Social Sciences 10 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 31 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2019.
All research outputs
#3,179,372
of 25,724,500 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,898
of 17,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,762
of 342,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#101
of 328 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,724,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 328 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.