Dataset Information

Plans of US Parents Regarding School Attendance for Their Children in the Fall of 2020: A National Survey.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

As schools consider reopening for in-person instruction prior to availability of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, families may be weighing their priorities regarding school attendance.

Objective

To characterize the association of planned in-person school attendance during the COVID-19 pandemic with factors, including family socioeconomic characteristics, and parent attitudes and beliefs about their child's school attendance.

Design, setting, and participants

Cross-sectional survey study. Data were collected from June 2, 2020, to June 5, 2020, weighted to reflect population norms, and analyzed using ordered probit regression. A sample of US parents (of children ages 5-17 years) were recruited using a nonprobability survey panel with stratification by socioeconomic characteristics.

Main outcomes and measures

The main outcome was parent-reported plan to send their child to school or keep their child home, conditional on their school opening for in-person instruction. Additional measures assessed family socioeconomic characteristics, medical vulnerability, worry about COVID-19 and multisystem inflammatory syndrome, confidence in their child's school, and homeschooling difficulties.

Results

The sample of 730 parents was balanced by parent sex (53% women) with successful oversampling for Black (28%; n = 201) and Hispanic (27%; n = 200) participants. In estimates weighted to US population norms, 31% (95% CI, 27% to 34%) of participants indicated they would probably or definitely keep their child home this fall, and 49% indicated that they would probably or definitely send their child to school this fall. Factors associated with planning to keep children home included lower income (38% with incomes <$50 000 vs 21% with incomes $100 000-$150 000 per year; difference, 17%; 95% CI, 9% to 26%), being unemployed (40% unemployed vs 26% employed; difference, 14%; 95% CI, 5% to 25%), and having a flexible job (33% with flexible jobs vs 19% with inflexible jobs; difference, 14%; 95% CI, 5% to 30%). Planning to keep children home was also associated with fear of COVID-19 (B = 0.19; P < .001), fear of multisystem inflammatory syndrome (B = 0.12; P = .04), confidence in schools (B = -0.22; P < .001), and challenges of homeschooling (B = -0.12; P = .01). Race and ethnicity were not significantly associated with plans to keep children home.

Conclusions and relevance

In this survey study, many parents planned to keep children home in fall 2020. Schools need to act soon to address parental concerns and provide options for what will be available for them should they opt to keep their child home. Structural barriers, such as lack of workplace flexibility and potential school-level inequities in implementation of preventive measures, must be acknowledged and addressed where possible.

SUBMITTER: Kroshus E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7428818 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Secondary or high school (HS) educational professionals expressed concerns about dealing with environmental and occupational health and safety protocols due to COVID-19. Concerns related to fall 2020 school re-opening and getting back into in-person teaching-whether full-time, part-time or some other approved hybrid model-plus ongoing uncertainty with how the state and federal government will be handling matters about mandates for virtual learning, rapid testing, vaccine distribution, etc. These concerns were related to both their experience as educational professionals and genuine interest in personal and student well-being. This study was a cross-sectional online survey in early fall from mid-September-early October 2020. Of a possible maximum participation of 740 New Jersey (NJ) supervisory-level HS teachers and administrators (e.g., department chairs, district and school principals), 100 confirmed unique respondents (13.5%) consented and completed the survey. Of 100 experienced (mean 18 years teaching) participants, 70% responded to the gender identity question (overall, 61% female, 39% male; by NJ region, gender ratios were similar). There were statistically significant differences (using Fischer's exact test) between NJ regions regarding provision of online counseling and support services for teachers (p < 0.001); for resources and equipment for teachers to mediate online learning (p = 0.02); for assistive video technology tools (p = 0.03) and accessibility to structured online learning and professional development (p = 0.002); concerning learning aids to engage students in online instruction, online counseling, and support services for students and their families (p = 0.006); appropriate protocol is clean and disinfect areas used by a person with COVID-19 (p = 0.002); and, immediately separate staff and students who screen positive for COVID-19 (p = 0.03). There were few statistical differences by gender. This study reported what participants wanted regarding the development of future policies then implemented as reopening practices. Data can inform recommendations in NJ and elsewhere at federal, state, and local levels. Data provide new insights and valuable information to inform the consideration of acceptability of various policy measures among HS education professionals.

Project description:ObjectivesOral health inequality in children is a widespread and well-documented problem in oral healthcare. However, objective and reliable methods to determine these inequalities in all oral health aspects, including both dental attendance and oral health, are rather scarce.AimsTo explore oral health inequalities and to assess the impact of socioeconomic factors on oral health, oral health behaviour and dental compliance of primary school children.MethodsData collection was executed in 2014 within a sample of 2216 children in 105 primary schools in Flanders, by means of an oral examination and a validated questionnaire. Intermutual Agency database was consulted to objectively determine individuals' social state and frequency of utilisation of oral healthcare services. Underprivileged children were compared with more fortunate children for their mean DMFt, DMFs, plaque index, care index (C, restorative index (RI), treatment index (TI), knowledge and attitude. Differences in proportions for dichotomous variables (RI100%, TI100% and being a regular dental attender) were analysed. The present study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Hospital Ghent (2010/061). All parents signed an informed consent form prior to data collection. All schools received information about the study protocol and agreed to participate. Children requiring dental treatment or periodic recall were referred to the local dentist.ResultsUnderprivileged children had higher D1MFT (95% CI 0.87 to 1.36), D3MT (95% CI 0.30 to 0.64), plaque scores (95% CI 0.12 to 0.23) and lower care level (p<0.02). In the low-income group, 78.4% was caries-free, compared with 88.4% for the other children. Half of the low-income children could be considered as regular dental attenders, while 12.6% did not have any dental visit during a 5-year period.ConclusionOral health, oral hygiene, oral healthcare level and dental attendance patterns are negatively affected by children's social class, leading to oral health inequalities in Belgian primary school children.