Project description:The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic led to closure of nearly all K-12 schools in the United States of America in March 2020. Although reopening K-12 schools for in-person schooling is desirable for many reasons, officials understand that risk reduction strategies and detection of cases are imperative in creating a safe return to school. Furthermore, consequences of reclosing recently opened schools are substantial and impact teachers, parents, and ultimately educational experiences in children. To address competing interests in meeting educational needs with public safety, we compare the impact of physical separation through school cohorts on SARS-CoV-2 infections against policies acting at the level of individual contacts within classrooms. Using an age-stratified Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Removed model, we explore influences of reduced class density, transmission mitigation, and viral detection on cumulative prevalence. We consider several scenarios over a 6-month period including (1) multiple rotating cohorts in which students cycle through in-person instruction on a weekly basis, (2) parallel cohorts with in-person and remote learning tracks, (3) the impact of a hypothetical testing program with ideal and imperfect detection, and (4) varying levels of aggregate transmission reduction. Our mathematical model predicts that reducing the number of contacts through cohorts produces a larger effect than diminishing transmission rates per contact. Specifically, the latter approach requires dramatic reduction in transmission rates in order to achieve a comparable effect in minimizing infections over time. Further, our model indicates that surveillance programs using less sensitive tests may be adequate in monitoring infections within a school community by both keeping infections low and allowing for a longer period of instruction. Lastly, we underscore the importance of factoring infection prevalence in deciding when a local outbreak of infection is serious enough to require reverting to remote learning.

Project description:The benefits of schools' closure, used as a containment strategy by many European countries, must be carefully considered against the adverse effects of child wellbeing. In this study, we assessed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence, which better estimates the real extent of the infection unraveling asymptomatic cases, among schoolchildren aged 3 to 18 in Milan, using dried blood spot, a safe and extremely viable methods for children, and then compared it between September 2020 and January 2021. Secondly, we evaluated the seroconversion rate and compared it between students attending schools in presence and those switched to distance-learning, using a logistic regression model, both as univariate and multivariate, adjusting for age and biological-sex. Among 1109 pupils, we found a seroprevalence of 2.8% in September before school reopening, while in January 2021, the seropositive rate was 12.5%, reflecting the general growth rate of infections during the second pandemic wave. The overall seroconversion rate was 10%, with no differences based on biological-sex and age groups; we observed no seroreversion. When considered age groups, the seroconversion rate was 10.5% (95%Confidence Interval, 2.9-24.8) among children attending preschools, 10.6% (95%Confidence Interval, 8.2-13.4) for primary schools, 9.9% (95%Confidence Interval, 6.8-13.8) for secondary schools, and 7.8% (95%Confidence Interval, 4-13.2) among high-school students. Interestingly, no differences in seroconversion rate were found between students who attended school compared to those who started remote learning in the first days of November. Furthermore, most patients (61%) reported that the contact occurred within the household. We reported a low seroconversion rate among school children in Milan, with no differences between those who attended from September 2020 to January 2021 compared to those who switched to remote learning in the first days of November. Our data suggest that schools do not amplify SARS-CoV-2 transmission, but rather reflect the level of the transmission in the community.

Project description:BackgroundThe ability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to protect against infection and onward transmission determines whether immunisation can control global circulation. We estimated the effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) and Oxford AstraZeneca adenovirus vector vaccine (ChAdOx1) vaccines against acquisition and transmission of the Alpha and Delta variants in a prospective household study in England.MethodsHouseholds were recruited based on adult purported index cases testing positive after reverse transcription-quantitative (RT-q)PCR testing of oral-nasal swabs. Purported index cases and their household contacts took oral-nasal swabs on days 1, 3 and 7 after enrolment and a subset of the PCR-positive swabs underwent genomic sequencing conducted on a subset. We used Bayesian logistic regression to infer vaccine effectiveness against acquisition and transmission, adjusted for age, vaccination history and variant.ResultsBetween 2 February 2021 and 10 September 2021, 213 index cases and 312 contacts were followed up. After excluding households lacking genomic proximity (N=2) or with unlikely serial intervals (N=16), 195 households with 278 contacts remained, of whom 113 (41%) became PCR positive. Delta lineages had 1.53 times the risk (95% Credible Interval: 1.04 - 2.20) of transmission than Alpha; contacts older than 18 years old were 1.48 (1.20 - 1.91) and 1.02 (0.93 - 1.16) times more likely to acquire an Alpha or Delta infection than children. Effectiveness of two doses of BNT162b2 against transmission of Delta was 36% (-1%, 66%) and 49% (18%, 73%) for ChAdOx1, similar to their effectiveness for Alpha. Protection against infection with Alpha was higher than for Delta, 69% (9%, 95%) vs. 18% (-11%, 59%), respectively, for BNT162b2 and 24% (-41%, 72%) vs. 9% (-15%, 42%), respectively, for ChAdOx1.ConclusionsBNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 reduce transmission of the Delta variant from breakthrough infections in the household setting, although their protection against infection within this setting is low.

Project description:BackgroundThousands of school systems have struggled with the decisions about how to deliver education safely and effectively amid the COVID19 pandemic. This study evaluates the public health impact of various school reopening scenarios (when, and how to return to in-person instruction) on the spread of COVID19.MethodsAn agent-based simulation model was adapted and used to project the impact of various school reopening strategies on the number of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths in the state of Georgia during the study period, i.e., February 18th-November 24th, 2020. The tested strategies include (i) schools closed, i.e., all students receive online instruction, (ii) alternating school day, i.e., half of the students receive in-person instruction on Mondays and Wednesdays and the other half on Tuesdays and Thursdays, (iii) alternating school day for children, i.e., half of the children (ages 0-9) receive in-person instruction on Mondays and Wednesdays and the other half on Tuesdays and Thursdays, (iv) children only, i.e., only children receive in-person instruction, (v) regular, i.e., all students return to in-person instruction. We also tested the impact of universal masking in schools.ResultsAcross all scenarios, the number of COVID19-related deaths ranged from approximately 8.8 to 9.9 thousand, the number of cumulative infections ranged from 1.76 to 1.96 million for adults and 625 to 771 thousand for children and youth, and the number of COVID19-related hospitalizations ranged from approximately 71 to 80 thousand during the study period. Compared to schools reopening August 10 with a regular reopening strategy, the percentage of the population infected reduced by 13%, 11%, 9%, and 6% in the schools closed, alternating school day for children, children only, and alternating school day reopening strategies, respectively. Universal masking in schools for all students further reduced outcome measures.ConclusionsReopening schools following a regular reopening strategy would lead to higher deaths, hospitalizations, and infections. Hybrid in-person and online reopening strategies, especially if offered as an option to families and teachers who prefer to opt-in, provide a good balance in reducing the infection spread compared to the regular reopening strategy, while ensuring access to in-person education.

Dataset Information

Implications of the school-household network structure on SARS-CoV-2 transmission under school reopening strategies in England.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets