== Link number 195 no longer works. ==

Title. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:82.194.204.37|82.194.204.37]] ([[User talk:82.194.204.37|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/82.194.204.37|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

== Incorrect frequency statement "child sexual abuse" ==

It seems there is an error in this article concerning the prevalence of „child sexual abuse“. This article defines „child sexual abuse“ as sexul contacts of „minors“ with persons with a big age difference (typically 5 years or more). In this sentence then is the mistake about the prevalence of this „child sexual abuse“ with a big age difference:

„A 2009 meta-analysis of 65 studies from 22 countries found a global prevalence of 19.7% for females and 7.9% for males.“

As a source this study is given:

„The prevalence of child sexual abuse in community and student samples: A meta-analysis“

Lots of the studies of this meta-analysis counted every forced sexual contact as child sexual abuse.

Just one example is this study:

"Higher prevalence of childhood sexual abuse among Latino men who have sex with men than non-Latino men who have sex with men: Data from the Urban Men’s Health Study"

So sexual abuse of peers was counted in the meta-analys as „child sexual abuse“.

According to dark field studies about 70 % of „sexual abuse“ of „children“ is done by peers (age difference <= 5 years). Just one example of such studies:

„A comparison of peer and nonpeer exposure to unwanted early sexual experiences among students in South Africa and Belgium“

So from my point of view to give the prevalence of „child sexual abuse“ with a big age difference it would be necessary to have a look at scientific studies about the prevalence of „child sexual abuse“ with a 5 year age difference. I am currently aware of one German study which had the result that from the 16- to 20-year olds 1,8 % were „sexual abused“ with body-contact:

Stadler et al. (2012): Repräsentativbefragung Sexueller Missbrauch 2011, KfN Forschungsbericht Nr.118, Kriminologisches Forschungsinstitut Niedersachsen e.V. (KFN), https://kfn.de/wp-content/uploads/Forschungsberichte/FB_118.pdf, assessed 18-Sep-2021

If anybody is aware of any other relevant studies it would breat if he could give us that information here. It would be good to have some more studies, maybe 4 or 5, wich could show us the real prevalence of „child sexual abuse“ with a 5 year or bigger age difference. Would be a kind of a small meta-analyis, not perfect, but better than nothing. Older studies migh be misleading because sexual contacts of „minors“ with much older persons decreased strongly in the last two decades accoding to studies.

Without a correction this article counts peer sexual abuse as „child sexual abuse“ with a big age difference which is scientifically clearly wrong from my point of view.