{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026041666666666668, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008101851851851851, 'mean_word_length': 5.380073800738008, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Child Sexual Abuse News: A Systematic Review of Content Analysis Studies

ABSTRACT Public knowledge and attitudes toward child sexual abuse are shaped through media depictions and coverage. Since the media are the main source of information about child sexual abuse, studies of child sexual abuse news can help us understand how news is created, how child sexual abuse is presented to the public, and what is the possible impact of such presentation and coverage on the audience. A systematic review of content analysis research is conducted using predefined criteria in order to identify quality studies, main findings, research gaps and to develop recommendations for future studies. International databases were systematically searched using keywords in September 2017. A total of 24 original quantitative content analysis studies published in the English language were included in the review and evaluated according to research methodology. The framework of child sexual abuse news media studies is developed and main findings are highlighted: (1) presentation and coverage of child sexual abuse (n = 7); (2) prevalence of coverage of CSA cases reported to the authorities (n = 2); (3) presentation and coverage of child abuse and sexual crimes where child sexual abuse is only a subtopic (n = 9); (4) presentation and coverage of specific child sexual abuse cases or issues (n = 6). Although studies represent valuable contribution, most did not meet content analysis design and reporting standards or both (e.g., calculating intercoder reliability), which seriously compromises validity and replicability requirements. Recommendation for future studies and most common errors in conducting content analysis are emphasized.