Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37650246›Full record

ReviewTrauma, violence & abuse2024

Parental Production of Child Sexual Abuse Material: A Critical Review.

Michael Salter, Tim Wong

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trauma, violence & abuse, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Child sexual abuse prevention strategies.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael SalterUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6446-9498
Tim WongUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this review is to summarize the available empirical research on parental production and to explore the discursive positioning of parental perpetrators within scholarship on child sexual abuse material (CSAM). Academic databases were searched using a combination of relevant terms, and the review was expanded as new terms were identified. The review identified 66 scholarly articles, papers, or books that referred to parental production of CSAM published since 1970. To explore how parental offenders have been positioned within this literature over time, the review is presented according to a chronological summary, drawing out key themes and empirical insights. The review showed that parental CSAM production is common, more likely to involve pre-pubescent victims, more severe abuse, female as well as male perpetrators, and produces high-demand illegal content with serious long-term sequelae. However, the review found that the focus of child trafficking and sexual exploitation scholarship on "commercial" and profit-driven abuse has marginalized and obscured parental CSAM production as a serious policy challenge. These findings warrant a reorientation of research, policy, and practice approaches to technology-facilitated child sexual exploitation, as well as a reflection on the resistance of researchers and policymakers to acknowledging the problem of family-based sexual exploitation.

Indexed as

Child Abuse, SexualParentsChildCrime VictimsFemaleHumansHuman TraffickingMaleParent-Child Relationschild sexual abuse materialcybercrimeincestinternetsexual abusesexual exploitationtrafficking

Identifiers

PMID37650246
PMCPMC11155224
OpenAlexW4386306203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.