Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39665337›Full record

ArticleThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2024

Unintended consequences of measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

Hannah Littlecott, Shari Krishnaratne, Julia Hummel, Ester Orban, Torben Heinsohn, Anna H Noel-Storr, Brigitte Strahwald, Caroline Jung-Sievers, Ulrike Ravens-Sieberer, Eva Rehfuess

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. School food environment interventions for health and sustainability.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Hannah LittlecottInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology - IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Shari KrishnaratneInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology - IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Julia HummelInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology - IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ester OrbanUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Torben HeinsohnDepartment of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Center for Infection Research, Braunschweig, Germany.
Anna H Noel-StorrPublishing and Technology Directorate, Cochrane, London, UK.
Brigitte StrahwaldInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology - IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Caroline Jung-SieversInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology - IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ulrike Ravens-SiebererDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Eva RehfuessInstitute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology - IBE, Chair of Public Health and Health Services Research, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThroughout the COVID-19 pandemic, schools were a key setting for intervening with public health and social measures (PHSM) to reduce transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Consequently, there is a need to assess the varied unintended consequences associated with PHSM implemented in the school setting, for students, teachers, and school staff, as well as for families and the wider community. This is an update of a Cochrane scoping review first published in 2022.

objectivesTo comprehensively identify and summarise the published literature on the unintended consequences of public health and social measures implemented in the school setting to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2. This will serve to identify critical knowledge gaps to inform future primary research and systematic reviews. It may also serve as a resource for future pandemic management. SEARCH

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, ERIC, and Web of Science on 5 and 6 January 2023. We also searched two COVID-19-specific databases (Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease). Finally, we reviewed the included studies of all relevant systematic reviews and guidelines identified through the searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that empirically assessed the impact of PHSM implemented in the school setting to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2. We imposed no restrictions with regard to the types of populations and specific interventions. Outcomes of interest were consequences that were measured or experienced, but not anticipated consequences. This review focused on real-world evidence: empirical quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies were eligible for inclusion, but modelling studies were ineligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The review was guided by a logic model. In line with the latest Cochrane effectiveness review of school measures to contain COVID-19 and a conceptual framework of PHSM, this logic model distinguishes between measures to make contacts safer (related to individual protection and the physical environment), measures to reduce contacts (related to social interactions, movement, and services) and surveillance and response measures. Unintended consequences comprise the following categories: health and well-being, health system and social welfare services, human and fundamental rights, acceptability and adherence, equality and equity, social and institutional, economic and resource, and ecological. The review team screened all titles and abstracts, then potentially eligible full-text articles, in duplicate. Across the included studies, we summarised and presented types of measures, consequences, and study designs using the predefined categories of the logic model, while allowing for emerging categories. MAIN

resultsWe included 60 studies (57 new to this update) from 25 countries. There were 31 quantitative studies, 17 qualitative studies, and 12 mixed-method studies. Most targeted either students (26 studies), teachers and school staff (11 studies), or students and school staff (12 studies). Others evaluated measures aimed at parents (2 studies), staff and parents (1 study), students and teachers (3 studies), or the whole school (5 studies). The measures were related to individual protection (26 studies), the physical environment (20 studies), social interactions (25 studies), services (1 study), movement (3 studies), surveillance (9 studies) and response (7 studies). Nine studies evaluated the combined effect of multiple measures. The main consequences assessed were from the categories health and well-being (29 studies), acceptability and adherence (31 studies), and social and institutional (23 studies). Fewer studies covered consequences from the categories equality and equity (2 studies), economic and resource (7 studies), and ecological (1 study). No studies examined consequences for the health system and social welfare services or for human and fundamental rights. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThis scoping review provides an overview of the evidence on the unintended consequences of PHSM implemented in the school setting to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2. The 60 included studies describe a broad body of evidence and cover a range of measures and unintended consequences, primarily consequences for health and well-being, acceptability and adherence, social and institutional aspects, and economic aspects. The main gaps identified relate to consequences of school measures for the health system and social welfare services, human and fundamental rights, equality and equity, and the environment. Further research is needed to fill these gaps, making use of diverse methodological approaches. Future studies should explore unintended consequences - whether beneficial or harmful - in more depth and over longer time periods, in different population groups, and across different contexts. A more robust evidence base could inform and facilitate decisions about whether, how, and when to implement or terminate COVID-19 risk mitigation measures in school settings, and how to counter negative unintended consequences.

fundingThis publication was partially funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the Network of University Medicine (NUM) 1.0, Grant No. 01KX2021 in the context of the project CEOsys, and NUM 2.0, Grant No. 01KX2121 in the context of the projects PREPARED and coverCHILD. REGISTRATION: The protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework (osf.io/bsxh8). The previous review is published in the Cochrane Library (10.1002/14651858.CD015397).

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsSchoolsChildCommunicable Disease ControlHumansPublic HealthSARS-CoV-2School Teachers

Identifiers

PMID39665337
PMCPMC11635916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.