Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36998431›Full record

ArticleSSM. Qualitative research in health2023

Qualitative longitudinal research on the experience of implementing Covid-19 prevention in English schools.

Neisha Sundaram, Nerissa Tilouche, Lucy Cullen, Paniz Hosseini, Patrick Nguipdop-Djomo, Sinéad M Langan, James R Hargreaves, Chris Bonell

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in SSM. Qualitative research in health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Neisha SundaramDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SH, United Kingdom.
Nerissa TiloucheDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SH, United Kingdom.
Lucy CullenDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SH, United Kingdom.
Paniz HosseiniDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SH, United Kingdom.
Patrick Nguipdop-DjomoDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom.
Sinéad M LanganDepartment of Non-communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom.
James R HargreavesDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SH, United Kingdom.
Chris BonellDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SH, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 205039/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implementation studies rarely examine how health interventions are delivered in emergencies. Informed by May's general theory of implementation (GTI), we undertook qualitative longitudinal research to investigate how schools in England implemented Covid-19-prevention measures and how this evolved over the 2020-2021 school year in a rapidly changing epidemiological and policy context. We conducted 74 semi-structured interviews over two time-points with headteachers, teachers, parents and students across eight primary and secondary schools. School leaders rapidly made sense of government guidance despite many challenges. They developed and disseminated prevention plans to staff, parents and students. As defined by GTI, 'cognitive participation' and 'collective action' to enact handwashing, one-way systems within schools and enhanced cleaning were sustained over time. However, measures such as physical distancing and placing students in separated groups were perceived to conflict with schools' mission to promote student education and wellbeing. Commitment to implement these was initially high during the emergency phase but later fluctuated dependant on perceived risk and local disease epidemiology. They were not considered sustainable in the long term. Adherence to some measures, such as wearing face-coverings, initially considered unworkable, improved as they were routinised. Implementing home-based asymptomatic testing was considered feasible. Formal and informal processes of 'reflexive monitoring' by staff informed improvements in intervention workability and implementation. Leaders also developed skills and confidence, deciding on locally appropriate actions, some of which deviated from official guidance. However, over time, accumulating staff burnout and absence eroded school capacity to collectively enact implementation. Qualitative longitudinal research allowed us to understand how implementation in an emergency involved the above emergent processes. GTI was useful in understanding school implementation processes in a pandemic context but may need adaptation to take into account the changing and sometimes contradictory objectives, time-varying factors and feedback loops that can characterise implementation of health interventions in emergencies.

Indexed as

Covid-19England (up to 8)ImplementationPreventionPreventive measuresQualitative longitudinal researchSARS-CoV-2Schools

Identifiers

PMID36998431
PMCPMC10037912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read9
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.