ArticleBMC public health2025
School life during COVID-19: a qualitative study exploring English secondary school staff and pupils' experiences of the school-based mitigation measures.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- When Corona Infested Everything-A Qualitative Interview Study Exploring the Impact of COVID-19 Mitigation Measures on School Life from the Perspectives of English Secondary School Staff and Students.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn England, the national Government was responsible for balancing the risks of COVID-19 infection, transmission and illness against the known risks of school closures. The Department for Education (DfE) issued guidance to schools, however, there is limited empirical evidence on the experiences of staff and pupils affected by the guidance and accompanying COVID-19 mitigation measures.
methodsThis qualitative study explored secondary school staff and pupils' views and experiences of COVID-19 guidance and mitigation measures. There were two main objectives: (i) to examine implementation effectiveness, and (ii) to explore their effectiveness at promoting safety. Participants were purposively sampled from English schools serving diverse communities participating in the CoMMinS (COVID-19 Mapping and Mitigation in Schools) study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted remotely, and data were analysed thematically.
resultsInterviews took place between January and August 2021 with participants from five secondary schools (20 staff and 25 pupils); staff represented a range of roles within the school and pupil demographics varied. Main themes were: (i) negative views of the DfE guidance; (ii) negative experiences of the DfE guidance; (iii) ineffectiveness of the DfE guidance and school mitigation measures at promoting safety and reducing risk; (iv) ineffective implementation of the mitigation measures due to poor adherence and acceptability (with sub-themes for Lateral Flow Testing (LFT), face coverings, physical distancing and ventilation); and (v) positive perceptions (with sub-themes for hygiene measures, and approaches that facilitated implementation and safety which included staff enforcing compliance, having an ethos of co-operation, addressing inconsistencies, and minimising change).
conclusionsInsights from this research will help understand effectiveness of the measures in the 'real-world school setting'. Understanding the experiences of staff and pupils will help to support policymakers and school leaders in future pandemic decision-making. This research identified challenges with the guidance and measures, minimal impact on perceived safety, and a negative impact on wellbeing. These challenges should be considered when assessing the benefit of the measures in keeping schools safe.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.