Safe environments-Through the eyes of 9-year-old schoolchildren from a socially vulnerable area in Sweden.
Karin Enskär, Gabriella E Isma, Margaretha Rämgård
PMID 32901974WHAT IT FOUND
9-year-olds in a vulnerable Swedish area defined safety by what they could see and do: bright, clean, colourful spaces with fun activities and trusted people nearby.
They felt unsafe in dark, dirty, isolated places or where they risked physical harm.
Key findings
01Children identified bright, beautiful, and clean places as safe, while messy, dirty, or smelly environments felt unsafe.
02Safety was linked to having fun activities to do and being with family, friends, or trusted adults; being alone created insecurity.
03Fear arose from exposure to danger, including dark areas, places with 'bad people' or traffic, and physical hazards like gravel.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study is limited to children from one specific socially vulnerable area in Sweden, so the findings may not transfer to other populations or contexts. The children's choice of photographic objects may have been influenced by the description of safety presented to them. The sample size is small (52 children), and the data collection was integrated into regular school activities, which might have affected the children's responses.
Declared interests
The study was part of a health promotion platform at Malmö University funded by VINNOVA, primarily for establishing the platform rather than for this specific research. There is no conflict of interest declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret these themes as evidence that changing the physical environment will objectively reduce crime or injury rates. The study reports the children's perceptions of safety, which are subjective and influenced by their immediate surroundings and social context, not a causal analysis of environmental risk.