Centre of Natural Hazards and Disaster Science, Uppsala University, 752 36 Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB1 8RN, UK.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 22;19(5):2500. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19052500.
School closure has been a common response to COVID-19. Yet, its implementation has hardly ever been based on rigorous analysis of its costs and benefits. We aim to first illustrate the unintended consequences and side effects of school closure, and then discuss the policy and research implications. This commentary frames evidence from the most recent papers on the topic from a public-health epidemiology and disaster risk reduction perspective. In particular, we argue that the benefits of school closure in terms of reduced infection rates should be better compared with its costs in terms of both short- and long-term damage on the physical, mental, and social well-being of children and society at large.
学校关闭是应对 COVID-19 的常见措施。然而,其实施几乎从未基于对其成本和收益的严格分析。我们旨在首先说明学校关闭的意外后果和副作用,然后讨论政策和研究意义。本评论从公共卫生流行病学和灾害风险减少的角度构建了关于该主题的最新论文的证据。特别是,我们认为,学校关闭在降低感染率方面的好处应该与其在儿童和整个社会的身心健康方面的短期和长期损害方面的成本进行更好的比较。