Dataset Information

Model-estimated relationship between elementary school-related SARS-CoV-2 transmission, mitigation interventions, and vaccination coverage across community incidence levels

ABSTRACT:

Background

While CDC guidance for K-12 schools recommends indoor masking regardless of vaccination status, final decisions about masking in schools will be made at the local and state level. The impact of the removal of mask restrictions, however, on COVID-19 outcomes for elementary students, educators/staff, and their households is not well known.

Methods

We used a previously published agent-based dynamic transmission model of SARS-CoV-2 in K-12 schools to simulate an elementary school with 638 students across 12 scenarios: combinations of three viral infectiousness levels (reflecting wild-type virus, alpha variant, and delta variant) and four student vaccination levels (0%, 25%, 50% and 70% coverage). For each scenario, we varied observed community COVID-19 incidence (0 to 50 cases/100,000 people/day) and mitigation effectiveness (0–100% reduction to in-school secondary attack rate), and evaluated two outcomes over a 30 day period: (1) the probability of at least one in-school transmission, and (2) average increase in total infections among students, educators/staff, and their household members associated with moving from more to less intensive mitigation measures.

Results

Over 30 days in the simulated elementary school, the probability of at least one in-school SARS-CoV-2 transmission and the number of estimated additional infections in the immediate school community associated with changes in mitigation measures varied widely. In one scenario with the delta variant and no student vaccination, assuming that baseline mitigation measures of simple ventilation and handwashing reduce the secondary attack rate by 40%, if decision-makers seek to keep the monthly probability of an in-school transmission below 50%, additional mitigation (e.g., masking) would need to be added at a community incidence of approximately 2/100,000/day. Once students are vaccinated, thresholds shift substantially higher.

Limitations

The interpretation of model results should be limited by the uncertainty in many of the parameters, including the effectiveness of individual mitigation interventions and vaccine efficacy against the delta variant, and the limited scope of the model beyond the school community. Additionally, the assumed case detection rate (33% of cases detected) may be too high in areas with decreased testing capacity.

Conclusion

Despite the assumption of high adult vaccination, the risks of both in-school SARS-CoV-2 transmission and resulting infections among students, educators/staff, and their household members remain high when the delta variant predominates and students are unvaccinated. Mitigation measures or vaccinations for students can substantially reduce these risks. These findings underscore the potential role for responsive plans, where mitigation is deployed based on local COVID-19 incidence and vaccine uptake.

SUBMITTER: Giardina J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8609905 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStudies have noted variations in the cost-effectiveness of school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV), but little is known about how SLIV's cost-effectiveness may vary by targeted age group (e.g., elementary or secondary school students), or vaccine consent process (paper-based or web-based). Further, SLIV's cost-effectiveness may be impacted by its spillover effect on practice-based vaccination; prior studies have not addressed this issue.MethodsWe performed a cost-effectiveness analysis on two SLIV programs in upstate New York in 2015-2016: (a) elementary school SLIV using a stepped wedge design with schools as clusters (24 suburban and 18 urban schools) and (b) secondary school SLIV using a cluster randomized trial (16 suburban and 4 urban schools). The cost-per-additionally-vaccinated child (i.e., incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)) was estimated by dividing the incremental SLIV intervention cost by the incremental effectiveness (i.e., the additional number of vaccinated students in intervention schools compared to control schools). We performed deterministic analyses, one-way sensitivity analyses, and probabilistic analyses.ResultsThe overall effectiveness measure (proportion of children vaccinated) was 5.7 and 5.5 percentage points higher, respectively, in intervention elementary (52.8%) and secondary schools (48.2%) than grade-matched control schools. SLIV programs vaccinated a small proportion of children in intervention elementary (5.2%) and secondary schools (2.5%). In elementary and secondary schools, the ICER excluding vaccine purchase was $85.71 and $86.51 per-additionally-vaccinated-child, respectively. When additionally accounting for observed spillover impact on practice-based vaccination, the ICER decreased to $80.53 in elementary schools -- decreasing substantially in secondary schools. (to $53.40). These estimates were higher than the published practice-based vaccination cost (median = $25.50, mean = $45.48). Also, these estimates were higher than our 2009-2011 urban SLIV program mean costs ($65) due to additional costs for use of a new web-based consent system ($12.97 per-additionally-vaccinated-child) and higher project coordination costs in 2015-2016. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that ICER estimates were most sensitive to the SLIV effectiveness.ConclusionsSLIV raises vaccination rates and may increase practice-based vaccination in primary care practices. While these SLIV programs are effective, to be as cost-effective as practice-based vaccination our SLIV programs would need to vaccinate more students and/or lower the costs for consent systems and project coordination.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02227186 (August 25, 2014), updated NCT03137667 (May 2, 2017).

Project description:BackgroundMandated vaccination for school attendance is a growing strategy internationally. Our aim was to investigate the effects of implementing school vaccination mandates on pediatric population vaccine coverage.MethodsIn this systematic review, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) and the PAIS Index for empirical studies of implementation of a primary or secondary school vaccination requirement published in any language through March 2019 with vaccination rates as an outcome. We sought additional studies by consulting experts, reference lists and grey literature sources. Included studies were too heterogeneous for meta-analysis; thus, we extracted data using a standardized rubric and synthesized the results narratively.ResultsAmong the 4232 citations obtained, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria. Eighteen were conducted with US data, 1 with Italian data, and 1 with Australian data. Four studies examined school-entry mandates, and 16 examined adolescent requirements. An uncontrolled before-after design was used in 10 studies, cross-sectional analysis in 7, a retrospective cohort design in 2, and a prospective cohort in 1. In many cases, increased documentation of coverage followed the addition of new requirements. The exception to this was human papillomavirus vaccination mandates, which were highly controversial, in the United States. The studies contained notable risks of bias, with cointerventions rarely acknowledged or accounted for, and subpopulations often excluded. A substantial risk of ecological fallacy existed for most studies.InterpretationVaccination mandates appear largely associated with increased vaccination coverage, but it is not possible to attribute causality to the mandate in most studies. High-quality implementation research that uses whole-population coverage data and takes into consideration cointerventions, confounders, clustering of unvaccinated populations and context is required.

Project description:BackgroundA measles outbreak occurred in a western county of China in 2013, the year after China's historic nadir of measles. We conducted a field investigation to identify gaps in measles vaccination coverage and immunization program weaknesses, and to provide recommendations for measles outbreak response and immunization program improvement.MethodsWe analyzed surveillance data from 2008 to 2013 to describe the measles epidemiology of the county. Measles-containing vaccine coverage was estimated using two methods: previously-reported administrative coverage and an estimation of coverage by clinic-kept vaccination records (n = 542). We conducted a rapid field coverage assessment in a migrant population village to evaluate coverage after emergency vaccination. We conducted a review of hospital records of measles cases to address the role hospital transmission played during the early stage of this outbreak.ResultsThere were 153 cases in the outbreak, primarily among children too young to vaccinate, unvaccinated children less than 3 years old, and adults. Measles-containing vaccine coverage by the field assessment showed that 20% of children aged 8-17 months had zero doses, and 9% of ?2 years old children had fewer than two doses. The vaccination statuses of all adult cases were either zero doses or unknown. At least 61% of cases had been hospitalized. The proportion of cases who had been hospital-exposed 7 to 21 days prior to rash onset decreased from 52% to 22% after hospitals strengthen their isolation measures.ConclusionsThis outbreak was a result of measles vaccination coverage gaps among young children and adults, and insufficient hospital isolation of cases. The lower coverage seen in the field estimation compared with reported coverage showed that reported coverage could have been overestimated. Hospitals were sites of transmission in the early stage of the outbreak. A strict hospital isolation policy could decrease spread of measles. Emergency vaccination was associated with stopping measles transmission in low coverage areas.

Project description:BackgroundFood and nutrition literacy is a newly emerged concept to connect food-related knowledge and skills to healthy diets. Its promotion is important to protect children as they eat too many low-nutrient, high-energy foods. Food and nutrition literacy promotion needs multi-dimensional interventions. In the process of developing an intervention to promote food and nutrition literacy, the present review protocol aims to critically examine the evidence in the area of school-based interventions for promoting food and nutrition literacy (FNLIT) in elementary school children.MethodsWe will search PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and ProQuest (from inception onwards). Additional studies will be identified through manual searching of reference lists. Quantitative studies (e.g., randomized controlled trial, quasi-randomized trials, and cluster randomized trials) evaluating the effect of interventions to promote food and nutrition literacy in elementary school children (5-12?years old) will be included. Main outcomes will be food and nutrition literacy at functional, interactive, and critical levels. Secondary outcomes will be dietary intake indicators (e.g., healthy eating index, DDS) and health outcome measures (e.g., reduction in BMI and less weight gain). Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. The study methodological quality (or bias) will be appraised using appropriate tools. If feasible, we will conduct random effects meta-analysis. The quality of the included studies will separately evaluate using the validated Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies, developed by the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP). Data will be extracted by two reviewers from the identified relevant literature. Standard data synthesis and analysis will be used for the review.DiscussionThis systematic review will summarize the evidence regarding the components, implementation methods, and effectiveness of the interventions of food and nutrition literacy promotion in elementary school children. The results of this review will provide a useful reference for policymakers and curriculum developers to assess education curricula and develop practical learning and teaching strategies to improve students' food and nutrition literacy.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO (CRD42019135118).

Project description:Green space has a variety of health benefits. However, little is known about its impact on autism, the fastest-growing neurodevelopmental disorder in children. This study examined the relationship between green space and childhood autism prevalence. Autism count data in 2010 were obtained for 543 of ~560 public elementary school districts in California. Multiple types of green space were measured in each school district, including percentages of forest, grassland, and average tree canopy and near-road tree canopy. Their associations with autism prevalence were evaluated with negative binomial regression models and spatial regression models. We observed inverse associations between several green space metrics and autism prevalence in school districts with high road density, the highly urbanized areas, but not in others. According to negative binomial regression models, adjusted rate ratios (RR) for the relationships in these school districts between autism prevalence and green space metrics in 10% increments were as follows: for forest, RR=0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84-0.95); for grassland, RR=0.90 (95% CI: 0.83-0.97); for average tree canopy, RR=0.89 (95% CI: 0.83-0.95), and for near-road tree canopy, RR=0.81 (95% CI: 0.73-0.91). These results suggest that increases of 10% in forest, grassland, average tree canopy and near-road tree canopy are associated with a decrease in autism prevalence of 10%, 10% 11% and 19%, respectively. In contrast, urban land and road density were positively associated with autism prevalence. The results of spatial regression models were consistent with those obtained by negative binomial models, except for grassland. Our study suggests that green space, specifically tree cover in areas with high road density, may influence autism prevalence in elementary school children beneficially. Further studies are needed to investigate a potential causal relationship, and the major mechanisms that may underlie the beneficial associations with green space, such as buffering traffic-related air pollution and noise.