ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Risky Play Is Not a Dirty Word: A Tool to Measure Benefit-Risk in Outdoor Playgrounds and Educational Settings.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parental perceptions of risky play and preschooler's motor creativity: mastery motivation as mediator and gender as moderator.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Risky Outdoor Play and Adventure Education in Nature for Child and Adolescent Wellbeing: A Scoping Review.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Challenge, adventure, and risky play have repeatedly been found to be learning environments that positively shape childhood well-being and development. Extant evidence-based research conveys the physical, cognitive, and socio-emotional growth associated with risky play provision. However, understanding the interplay of risky play, injury, and safety is more nuanced and complex. The goal of this paper is to introduce a tool which allows educators, parents, health practitioners, urban planners, playground designers, certifiers, manufacturers, and inspectors to estimate both the benefit and risk of outdoor play and learning settings, such as playgrounds, adventure parks, or risk-taking activities. One of the key challenges associated with societal risk appetite or risk tolerance has been the inability to quantify the inherent benefits of risk taking in playgrounds and educational settings. Historically, the assessment of 'benefit-risk' has been dominated by a zero tolerance of incidents, whether in the workplace or road safety settings. Against this backdrop, if playgrounds and outdoor learning settings are boring, children will go elsewhere to seek thrills and adventure, which may often be manifested in antisocial behaviour. In 2023, 'benefit-risk' was formally recognised in the area of sport and recreation by the International Organisation for Standardisation, when it published the ISO 4980:2023 benefit-risk assessment for sport and recreational facilities, activities, and equipment. ISO 4980:2023 is a departure from the traditional view of risk management, in that it presents a perspective of risk which is not limited to framing risk as negative, but rather balances the calculation of positive benefits as well as the risks associated with the activity. Correspondingly, hazardous situations which have zero benefit should be eliminated or mitigated. The tool introduced in this paper offers playground inspectors and educators the ability to measure and assess both the benefit and risk of outdoor playgrounds and educational settings where children play, learn, and flourish.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.