Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36538517›Full record

Observational studyPLoS medicine2022

Infection and transmission risks of COVID-19 in schools and their contribution to population infections in Germany: A retrospective observational study using nationwide and regional health and education agency notification data.

Torben Heinsohn, Berit Lange, Patrizio Vanella, Isti Rodiah, Stephan Glöckner, Alexander Joachim, Dennis Becker, Tobias Brändle, Stefan Dhein, Stefan Ehehalt and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PLoS medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Torben HeinsohnDepartment of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI), Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1175-2633
Berit LangeDepartment of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI), Braunschweig, Germany.
Patrizio VanellaDepartment of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI), Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6736-6774
Isti RodiahDepartment of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI), Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4365-1615
Stephan GlöcknerDepartment of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI), Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7975-9049
Alexander JoachimDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6724-0015
Dennis BeckerPublic Health Department Konstanz, Gottmadingen, Germany.
Tobias BrändleInstitute of Educational Monitoring and Quality Development, Agency for Schools and Vocational Training, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8872-9872
Stefan DheinPublic Health Department Altenburger Land, Altenburg, Germany.
Stefan EhehaltPublic Health Department Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
Mira FriesPublic Health Department Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Annette Galante-GottschalkPublic Health Department Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2024-0979
Stefanie JehnichenPublic Health Department Konstanz, Gottmadingen, Germany.
Sarah KolkmannPublic Health Department Altenburger Land, Altenburg, Germany.
Annelene KossowPublic Health Department Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Martin HellmichInstitute of Medical Statistics and Computational Biology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Jörg DötschDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Gérard KrauseDepartment of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI), Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3328-8808
German Center for Infection Research · DEUniversity of Cologne · DECBS International Business School · DEKlinikum Altenburger Land · DEStuttgart Observatory · DEHamburg Institute for Vocational Education and Training · DEHelmholtz Centre for Infection Research · DEMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSchool-level infection control measures in Germany during the early Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic differed across the 16 federal states and lacked a dependable evidence base, with available evidence limited to regional data restricted to short phases of the pandemic. This study aimed to assess the (a) infection risks in students and staff; (b) transmission risks and routes in schools; (c) effects of school-level infection control measures on school and population infection dynamics; and (d) contribution of contacts in schools to population cases. METHODS AND

findingsFor this retrospective observational study, we used German federal state (NUTS-2) and county (NUTS-3) data from public health and education agencies from March 2020 to April 2022. We assessed (a) infection risk as cumulative risk and crude risk ratios and (b) secondary attack rates (SARs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We used (c) multiple regression analysis for the effects of infection control measures such as reduced attendance, mask mandates, and vaccination coverage as absolute reduction in case incidence per 100,000 inhabitants per 14 days and in percentage relative to the population, and (d) infection dynamic modelling to determine the percentage contribution of school contacts to population cases. We included (a) nationwide NUTS-2 data from calendar weeks (W) 46-50/2020 and W08/2021-W15/2022 with 3,521,964 cases in students and 329,283 in teachers; (b) NUTS-3 data from W09-25/2021 with 85,788 student and 9,427 teacher cases; and (c) detailed data from 5 NUTS-3 regions from W09/2020 to W27/2021 with 12,814 cases (39% male, 37% female; median age 14, range 5 to 63), 43,238 contacts and 4,165 secondary cases for students (for teachers, 14,801 [22% male, 50% female; median age 39, range 16 to 75], 5,893 and 472). Infection risk (a) for students and teachers was higher than the population risk in all phases of normal presence class and highest in the early 2022 omicron wave with 30.6% (95% CI 30.5% to 32.6%) of students and 32.7% (95% CI 32.6% to 32.8%) of teachers infected in Germany. SARs (b) for students and staff were below 5% in schools throughout the study period, while SARs in households more than doubled from 13.8% (95% CI 10.6% to 17.6%) W21-39/2020 to 28.7% (95% CI 27% to 30.4%) in W08-23/2021 for students and 10.9% (95% CI 7% to 16.5%) to 32.7% (95% CI 28.2% to 37.6%) for staff. Most contacts were reported for schools, yet most secondary cases originated in households. In schools, staff predominantly infected staff. Mandatory surgical mask wearing during class in all schools was associated with a reduction in the case incidence of students and teachers (c), by 56/100,000 persons per 14 days (students: 95% CI 47.7 to 63.4; teachers: 95% CI 39.6 to 71.6; p < 0.001) and by 29.8% (95% CI 25% to 35%, p < 0.001) and 24.3% (95% CI 13% to 36%, p < 0.001) relative to the population, respectively, as were reduced attendance and higher vaccination coverage. The contribution of contacts in schools to population cases (d) was 2% to 20%, lowest during school closures/vacation and peaked during normal presence class intervals, with the overall peak early during the omicron wave. Limitations include underdetection, misclassification of contacts, interviewer/interviewee dependence of contact-tracing, and lack of individual-level confounding factors in aggregate data regression analysis.

conclusionIn this study, we observed that open schools under hygiene measures and testing strategies contributed up to 20% of population infections during the omicron wave early 2022, and as little as 2% during vacations/school closures; about a third of students and teachers were infected during the omicron wave in early 2022 in Germany. Mandatory mask wearing during class in all school types and reduced attendance models were associated with a reduced infection risk in schools.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdolescentAdultEducational StatusFemaleGermanyHumansMaleSchoolsStudents

Identifiers

PMID36538517
PMCPMC9767368
OpenAlexW4313312721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.