Cambridge Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
BMJ Open. 2021 Aug 17;11(8):e053371. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053371.
To systematically reivew the observational evidence of the effect of school closures and school reopenings on SARS-CoV-2 community transmission.
Schools (including early years settings, primary schools and secondary schools).
School closures and reopenings.
Community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (including any measure of community infections rate, hospital admissions or mortality attributed to COVID-19).
On 7 January 2021, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, the WHO Global COVID-19 Research Database, ERIC, the British Education Index, the Australian Education Index and Google, searching title and abstracts for terms related to SARS-CoV-2 AND terms related to schools or non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool to evaluate bias.
We identified 7474 articles, of which 40 were included, with data from 150 countries. Of these, 32 studies assessed school closures and 11 examined reopenings. There was substantial heterogeneity between school closure studies, with half of the studies at lower risk of bias reporting reduced community transmission by up to 60% and half reporting null findings. The majority (n=3 out of 4) of school reopening studies at lower risk of bias reported no associated increases in transmission.
School closure studies were at risk of confounding and collinearity from other non-pharmacological interventions implemented around the same time as school closures, and the effectiveness of closures remains uncertain. School reopenings, in areas of low transmission and with appropriate mitigation measures, were generally not accompanied by increasing community transmission. With such varied evidence on effectiveness, and the harmful effects, policymakers should take a measured approach before implementing school closures; and should look to reopen schools in times of low transmission, with appropriate mitigation measures.
系统评价学校关闭和重新开放对 SARS-CoV-2 社区传播的观察性证据。
学校(包括早期教育机构、小学和中学)。
学校关闭和重新开放。
SARS-CoV-2 的社区传播(包括任何社区感染率、归因于 COVID-19 的住院或死亡率的测量)。
2021 年 1 月 7 日,我们在 PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus、CINAHL、世界卫生组织全球 COVID-19 研究数据库、ERIC、英国教育索引、澳大利亚教育索引和 Google 上搜索,标题和摘要中搜索与 SARS-CoV-2 相关的术语和与学校或非药物干预(NPIs)相关的术语。我们使用 Cochrane 非随机干预研究风险偏倚工具来评估偏倚。
我们确定了 7474 篇文章,其中 40 篇被纳入,数据来自 150 个国家。其中,32 项研究评估了学校关闭,11 项研究检查了重新开放。学校关闭研究之间存在很大的异质性,一半的低风险偏倚研究报告社区传播减少了高达 60%,一半报告了无效的发现。在低风险偏倚的 4 项学校重新开放研究中,有 3 项研究报告没有与传播增加相关。
学校关闭研究存在与其他非药物干预措施混淆和共线性的风险,这些措施是在学校关闭的同时实施的,关闭的有效性仍然不确定。在低传播地区和采取适当缓解措施的情况下,学校重新开放通常不会伴随着社区传播的增加。由于有效性证据如此多样化,以及对健康的有害影响,决策者在实施学校关闭之前应采取谨慎的方法;并且应该在低传播时期,采取适当的缓解措施,重新开放学校。