{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030165912518853696, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021870286576168928, 'mean_word_length': 5.230046948356808, '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}}
A debate about risk, violence, and gender: a review of health production on sexting among young people.

This is a systematic review of the health production on sexting between 2009 and 2019. The scientific production was analyzed regarding its context (gender of the first author, publication year, and country of realization), publication type, knowledge field, themes, subjects addressed, and their conception about sexting. The 147 works on sexting as a central theme retrieved from PubMed were analyzed during the second semester of 2019. The search was done on the term of sexting. A descriptive statistical, interpretive analysis was carried out to assess the approach to risk, violence, and gender in these publications. Most first authors of these publications were female, and most manuscripts were published in the U.S. between 2017 and 2019 and adopted a quantitative approach (approximately 65%). Almost half of the productions' central theme was the prevalence of sexting or risky behavior among adolescents. The vast majority also attributed risky behavior to sexting somehow, from which violence can be inferred (70%). A negligible part of publications employed a gender approach (less than 15%). The health productions have insufficiently analyzed sexting by not distinguishing healthy from violent practices.