Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36729116›Full record

ArticleEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin2023

Minimising school disruption under high incidence conditions due to the Omicron variant in France, Switzerland, Italy, in January 2022.

Elisabetta Colosi, Giulia Bassignana, Alain Barrat, Bruno Lina, Philippe Vanhems, Julia Bielicki, Vittoria Colizza

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Effectiveness of social distancing measures and lockdowns for reducing transmission of COVID-19 in non-healthcare, community-based settings.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Elisabetta ColosiSorbonne Université, INSERM, Pierre Louis Institute of Epidemiology and Public Health, Paris, France.
Giulia BassignanaSorbonne Université, INSERM, Pierre Louis Institute of Epidemiology and Public Health, Paris, France.
Alain BarratAix Marseille Univ, Université de Toulon, CNRS, CPT, Turing Center for Living Systems, Marseille, France.
Bruno LinaCentre International de Recherche en Infectiologie (CIRI), Virpath Laboratory, INSERM U1111, CNRS-UMR 5308, École Normale Supérieure de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon, Lyon University, Lyon, France.
Philippe VanhemsCentre International de Recherche en Infectiologie (CIRI), Public Health, Epidemiology and Evolutionary Ecology of Infectious Diseases (PHE3ID) - Inserm - U1111 - UCBL Lyon 1 - CNRS -UMR5308 - ENS de Lyon, Lyon, France.
Julia BielickiPaediatric Infectious Diseases, University of Basel Children's Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
Vittoria ColizzaSorbonne Université, INSERM, Pierre Louis Institute of Epidemiology and Public Health, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundAs record cases of Omicron variant were registered in Europe in early 2022, schools remained a vulnerable setting undergoing large disruption.AimThrough mathematical modelling, we compared school protocols of reactive screening, regular screening, and reactive class closure implemented in France, in Baselland (Switzerland), and in Italy, respectively, and assessed them in terms of case prevention, testing resource demand, and schooldays lost.MethodsWe used a stochastic agent-based model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in schools accounting for within- and across-class contacts from empirical contact data. We parameterised it to the Omicron BA.1 variant to reproduce the French Omicron wave in January 2022. We simulated the three protocols to assess their costs and effectiveness for varying peak incidence rates in the range experienced by European countries.ResultsWe estimated that at the high incidence rates registered in France during the Omicron BA.1 wave in January 2022, the reactive screening protocol applied in France required higher test resources compared with the weekly screening applied in Baselland (0.50 vs 0.45 tests per student-week), but achieved considerably lower control (8% vs 21% reduction of peak incidence). The reactive class closure implemented in Italy was predicted to be very costly, leading to > 20% student-days lost.ConclusionsAt high incidence conditions, reactive screening protocols generate a large and unplanned demand in testing resources, for marginal control of school transmissions. Comparable or lower resources could be more efficiently used through weekly screening. Our findings can help define incidence levels triggering school protocols and optimise their cost-effectiveness.

Indexed as

COVID-19FranceHumansIncidenceItalySARS-CoV-2SchoolsSwitzerlandCOVID-19Omicronresourcesschoolstestingvaccination

Identifiers

PMID36729116
PMCPMC9896604

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.