↓ 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 (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 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 14 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 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 96 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 28 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 17%
Social Sciences 11 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 31 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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
#3,356,044
of 25,918,061 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,139
of 17,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,351
of 343,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#108
of 327 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,918,061 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 17,930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 343,121 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 327 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 66% of its contemporaries.