Search

Objectives: To systematically reivew the observational evidence of the effect of school closures and school reopenings on SARS-CoV-2 community transmission., Setting: Schools (including early years settings, primary schools and secondary schools)., Intervention: School closures and reopenings., Outcome Measure: Community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (including any measure of community infections rate, hospital admissions or mortality attributed to COVID-19)., Methods: On 7 January 2021, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, the WHO Global COVID-19 Research Database, ERIC, the British Education Index, the Australian Education Index and Google, searching title and abstracts for terms related to SARS-CoV-2 AND terms related to schools or non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool to evaluate bias., Results: We identified 7474 articles, of which 40 were included, with data from 150 countries. Of these, 32 studies assessed school closures and 11 examined reopenings. There was substantial heterogeneity between school closure studies, with half of the studies at lower risk of bias reporting reduced community transmission by up to 60% and half reporting null findings. The majority (n=3 out of 4) of school reopening studies at lower risk of bias reported no associated increases in transmission., Conclusions: School closure studies were at risk of confounding and collinearity from other non-pharmacological interventions implemented around the same time as school closures, and the effectiveness of closures remains uncertain. School reopenings, in areas of low transmission and with appropriate mitigation measures, were generally not accompanied by increasing community transmission. With such varied evidence on effectiveness, and the harmful effects, policymakers should take a measured approach before implementing school closures; and should look to reopen schools in times of low transmission, with appropriate mitigation measures., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Rapid demographic, epidemiological, and nutritional transitons have brought a pressing need to track progress in adolescent health. Here, we present country-level estimates of 12 headline indicators from the Lancet Commission on adolescent health and wellbeing, from 1990 to 2016., Methods: Indicators included those of health outcomes (disability-adjusted life-years [DALYs] due to communicable, maternal, and nutritional diseases; injuries; and non-communicable diseases); health risks (tobacco smoking, binge drinking, overweight, and anaemia); and social determinants of health (adolescent fertility; completion of secondary education; not in education, employment, or training [NEET]; child marriage; and demand for contraception satisfied with modern methods). We drew data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2016, International Labour Organisation, household surveys, and the Barro-Lee education dataset., Findings: From 1990 to 2016, remarkable shifts in adolescent health occurred. A decrease in disease burden in many countries has been offset by population growth in countries with the poorest adolescent health profiles. Compared with 1990, an additional 250 million adolescents were living in multi-burden countries in 2016, where they face a heavy and complex burden of disease. The rapidity of nutritional transition is evident from the 324·1 million (18%) of 1·8 billion adolescents globally who were overweight or obese in 2016, an increase of 176·9 million compared with 1990, and the 430·7 million (24%) who had anaemia in 2016, an increase of 74·2 million compared with 1990. Child marriage remains common, with an estimated 66 million women aged 20-24 years married before age 18 years. Although gender-parity in secondary school completion exists globally, prevalence of NEET remains high for young women in multi-burden countries, suggesting few opportunities to enter the workforce in these settings., Interpretation: Although disease burden has fallen in many settings, demographic shifts have heightened global inequalities. Global disease burden has changed little since 1990 and the prevalence of many adolescent health risks have increased. Health, education, and legal systems have not kept pace with shifting adolescent needs and demographic changes. Gender inequity remains a powerful driver of poor adolescent health in many countries., Funding: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)