Children’s outdoor active mobility behaviour and neighbourhood safety: a systematic review in measurement methods and future research directions

Abstract

Background Numerous studies have examined the association between safety and primary school-aged children’s forms of active mobility. However, variations in studies’ measurement methods and the elements addressed have contributed to inconsistencies in research outcomes, which may be forming a barrier to advancing researchers’ knowledge about this field. To assess where current research stands, we have synthesised the methodological measures in studies that examined the effects of neighbourhood safety exposure (perceived and measured) on children’s outdoor active mobility behaviour and used this analysis to propose future research directions. Method A systematic search of the literature in six electronic databases was conducted using pre-defined eligibility criteria and was concluded in July 2020. Two reviewers screened the literature abstracts to determine the studies’ inclusion, and two reviewers independently conducted a methodological quality assessment to rate the included studies. Results Twenty-five peer-reviewed studies met the inclusion criteria. Active mobility behaviour and health characteristics were measured objectively in 12 out of the 25 studies and were reported in another 13 studies. Twenty-one studies overlooked spatiotemporal dimensions in their analyses and outputs. Delineations of children’s neighbourhoods varied within 10 studies’ objective measures, and the 15 studies that opted for subjective measures. Safety perceptions obtained in 22 studies were mostly static and primarily collected via parents, and dissimilarities in actual safety measurement methods were present in 6 studies. The identified schematic constraints in studies’ measurement methods assisted in outlining a three-dimensional relationship between ‘what’ (determinants), ‘where’ (spatial) and ‘when’ (time) within a methodological conceptual framework. Conclusions The absence of standardised measurement methods among relevant studies may have led to the current diversity in findings regarding active mobility, spatial (locality) and temporal (time) characteristics, the neighbourhood, and the representation of safety. Ignorance of the existing gaps and heterogeneity in measures may impact the reliability of evidence and poses a limitation when synthesising findings, which could result in serious biases for policymakers. Given the increasing interest in children’s health studies, we suggested alternatives in the design and method of measures that may guide future evidence-based research for policymakers who aim to improve children’s active mobility and safety.

Is there a correlation between children’s outdoor active mobility behaviour and neighbourhood safety? A systematic review of the evidence

“…Our methodological quality assessment revealed that most studies fulfilled elements relevant to studies reporting but essentially lacked addressing components in the design, method of measurement, and analysis for evidence-based research on children's active health. 32 This may have resulted in the majority of studies were of moderate and poor quality. Subjective measures using questionnaires rely on human recall distant events.…”

“…65 Yet, we found some inconsistencies among studies employing objective measures. Although a review of measurement methods is out of the scope of this paper, the discrepancies in some of the outcome necessitate highlighting some critical research challenges for future research attention yet were elaborated further elsewhere by Zougheibe et al 32 Study design is likely to affect the outcome. Longitudinal studies limit selection bias associated with cross-sectional design.…”

“…We expanded on six items to the checklist based on findings from a recent systematic review of which methodological measures in observational studies were assessed and found to be fundamental to increase reliability in children's active behaviour research. 32 Those measures were covering: COAMB (objective or subjective), temporality elements such as change in time of day, weekdays or weekends (addressed in both perceptions of safety as well as COAMB), the delineation of the neighbourhood area (arbitrary or measured) and accounting for cofounders. We adopted the scoring system applied by Marzi and Reimers 31 and Schoeppe et al 24 to quantify study robustness.…”

“…Methodological improvements to reduce inconsistency in the outcome and increase reliability in future research can better inform evidence-based policy. Namely: encouraging longitudinal study design and adopting a three-dimensional conceptual framework in research as suggested earlier 32 to account for critical elements of ( 1) what we measure: the determinants that affect the outcome and consistent accounting Open access for cofounders (sex/gender, SES background, and ethnicity/race background), (2) how we measure: involves frequency and intensity for perceived safety [69][70][71] (personal and roads) and active behaviour whether reported or measured consistency in addressing crimes only relevant to personal safety, and (3) spatiotemporal characteristics (i.e., locality of active behaviour or safety incident, spatial extents of children neighbourhoods, and time). 72 Further research on COAMB correlates to variability in parents to their children safety perception or measured to perceived safety, and inequality in the neighbourhood (SES) would answer more profound research questions.…”

School-Level Economic Disparities in Police-Reported Crimes and Active Commuting to School

“…The majority of research on crime-related determinants of ACS has centered on parental perceptions of crime, which are consistently indirectly associated with children's ACS behavior [12][13][14]. However, only two studies with inconsistent findings have examined associations between police-reported crime and ACS [14,15].…”