[Skip to Content]
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 45,075
Citations 0
Viewpoint
May 13, 2020

School Closure During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An Effective Intervention at the Global Level?

Author Affiliations
  • 1Pediatric Clinic, Pietro Barilla Children’s Hospital, University of Parma, Parma, Italy
  • 2Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
JAMA Pediatr. Published online May 13, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.1892

In most countries, attempts to reduce severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) circulation and new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) development have been mainly based on restrictive measures, including the avoidance of social interactions, the prohibition of movements within the national territory, and the closure of all nonessential activities, including schools. While the closure of factories and the avoidance of other social interaction together with proper hand washing remain the best measures to reduce the total burden of COVID-19, the usefulness of school closure can be debated.

It is highly likely that the most important reason leading governments to close schools was the evidence that the early introduction of this restrictive measure had been effective in reducing influenza incidence rates and related clinical, social, and economic problems during both seasonal and pandemic influenza outbreaks.1 However, it is not at all certain that the same advantages can be expected in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is even possible that school closure may have negative effects and lead to greater medical, economic, and social problems. Modeling studies seem to indicate that school closure can be significantly effective for infection control only when the outbreaks are due to viruses with low transmissibility and attack rates are higher in children than in adults. This applies to influenza viruses and influenza infection but does not seem valid for coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2, which have different transmission dynamics, or for COVID-19, which affects mainly adults and elderly individuals. It has been calculated that the expected number of cases directly generated by 1 case of SARS-CoV-2 infection (R0) is high and not lower than 2.5.2 Moreover, children younger than 10 years account for only 1% of COVID-19 cases,3 and although a certain number of them can experience an asymptomatic infection, the total number of children with SARS-CoV-2 infection seems lower than expected. Although no official data are available, to our knowledge, on the effectiveness of school closure during the COVID-19 epidemic, the poor relevance of this restrictive measure seems confirmed by the evidence that in Taiwan, the spread of COVID-19 was minimized without widespread planned school closures.4 On the other hand, using UK population and school data together with data on SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics calculated in the early COVID-19 pandemic in China, it was predicted that school closure would be insufficient to mitigate the pandemic. Finally, the poor effect of school closure during coronavirus epidemics has already been evidenced in some studies carried out during the SARS epidemic. In China, it was found that school closure for 2 months was not significantly effective for disease prevention mainly because of the very low incidence of symptomatic disease among school-aged children.5 Moreover, in Taiwan, it was evidenced that the risk of transmission of infection among children in a classroom was very low, with an R0 less than 1, clearly highlighting that school closure could be only marginally effective.4 In a 2020 systematic review, Viner et al6 showed that there are no data on the relative contribution of school closures to SARS-CoV-2 transmission control. Data from the SARS outbreak in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Singapore suggest that school closures did not contribute to the control of the epidemic. Recent modeling studies of COVID-19 from the United Kingdom using data from the Wuhan province, China, outbreak predicted that school closures alone would prevent only 2% to 4% of deaths, much less than other social distancing interventions.7

While the efficacy of school closure is debatable, the potential negative consequences of this measure cannot be ignored. Some consequences regard the family. To take care of the youngest children when daycares and schools are closed, parents must remain at home, with inevitable economic consequences. In addition, when parents are health care workers, this can have relevant medical effects. In the US, it has been calculated that the absence from work of 15% of health care workers may be associated with a significant increase in COVID-19 mortality.8 If parents must work and grandparents must become the primary caretakers of children, the risk significantly increases that these persons, who are per se at the greatest risk of serious illness, may become infected, and this is what happened in Italy in the first 2 weeks when school closure was decided but other work activities were not stopped. Moreover, school closure can cause risks of deepening social, economic, and health inequities, particularly in limited-income countries. In the countries where the Ebola epidemic took place in 2014 to 2016, school closure was associated with increased child labor, violence, and socioeconomic problems.8 Finally, the distance learning through digital technologies that has been planned by several countries to replace traditional school can be difficult to implement even in some industrialized countries. In Italy, a 2015 survey carried out by the National Institute of Statistics9 showed that in the poorest areas of the country, 41% of the households did not have a tablet or a personal computer and that among families with at least 1 child, only 14.3% could guarantee distance learning. This means that a relevant group of children may remain substantially excluded not only from learning but also from any form of socialization with peers and with the surrounding world. All these limitations explain why some experts suggest that the potential advantages of school closure, if any, have to be balanced against the secondary adverse effects. Instead of total school closure, alternative strategies to contain transmission, such as reducing class size, physical distancing, and hygiene promotion, could be implemented.

Another important but unsolved problem strictly related to school closure is how and when school can be reopened. During influenza outbreaks, reopening has been associated with the risk of epidemic resurgence. The best solution for the COVID-19 pandemic is not known. It has been suggested that children who test positive on serologic tests that identify IgG against SARS-CoV-2 could be admitted to school. It is supposed that positivity could allow the identification of children who have already been infected, can be considered protected, and can attend school without posing risks per se to other children. However, the use of this procedure can be strongly criticized. The sensitivity of the presently available antibody tests is suboptimal. Most children have an asymptomatic infection, and as the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection has been found to be greater the more serious the disease is, it seems likely that most children will have a low antibody titer that is inadequate for obtaining positivity on tests with relatively low sensitivity.10 Moreover, even when IgG levels are measured, it is not possible to state whether children are protected or how long the protection may last. The antibody protective level and secondary immune response to SARS-CoV-2 are not known. Taken together, these factors seem to indicate that most children with IgG positivity cannot be identified and, even if identified, cannot be considered protected for the long term. Other criteria, such as a systematic adoption of face masks with some lessons on this issue and on all hygiene measures for COVID-19 prevention, screening with temperature measurements, or closing classrooms with infected students, must be followed when school is resumed.

Back to top
Article Information

Corresponding Author: Susanna Esposito, MD, Pediatric Clinic, Pietro Barilla Children’s Hospital, University of Parma, Via Gramsci 14, 43126 Parma, Italy (susanna.esposito@unimi.it).

Published Online: May 13, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.1892

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

References
1.
Litvinova  M, Liu  QH, Kulikov  ES, Ajelli  M.  Reactive school closure weakens the network of social interactions and reduces the spread of influenza.   Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019;116(27):13174-13181. doi:10.1073/pnas.1821298116PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Wu  JT, Leung  K, Leung  GM.  Nowcasting and forecasting the potential domestic and international spread of the 2019-nCoV outbreak originating in Wuhan, China: a modelling study.   Lancet. 2020;395(10225):689-697. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30260-9PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Wu  Z, McGoogan  JM.  Characteristics of and important lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China: summary of a report of 72 314 cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention.   JAMA. 2020;323(13):1239-1242. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.2648PubMedGoogle Scholar
4.
Wang  CJ, Ng  CY, Brook  RH.  Response to COVID-19 in Taiwan: big data analytics, new technology, and proactive testing.   JAMA. 2020;323(14):1341-1342. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.3151PubMedGoogle Scholar
5.
Pang  X, Zhu  Z, Xu  F,  et al.  Evaluation of control measures implemented in the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak in Beijing, 2003.   JAMA. 2003;290(24):3215-3221. doi:10.1001/jama.290.24.3215PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Viner  RM, Russell  SJ, Croker  H,  et al.  School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including COVID-19: a rapid systematic review.   Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020;4(5):397-404. doi:10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30095-XPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Ferguson  NM, Laydon  D, Nedjati-Gilani  G,  et al. Report 9: impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand. Accessed April 22, 2020. https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk:8443/bitstream/10044/1/77482/14/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf
8.
Bayham  J, Fenichel  EP.  Impact of school closures for COVID-19 on the US health-care workforce and net mortality: a modelling study.   Lancet Public Health. Published online April 3, 2020. doi:10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30082-7PubMedGoogle Scholar
9.
Italian National Institute of Statistics. Italy in figures. Accessed April 22, 2020. https://www.istat.it/en/files/2015/09/ItalyinFigures2015.pdf
10.
Zhao  J, Yuan  Q, Wang  H,  et al.  Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019.   Clin Infect Dis. Published online March 28, 2020. doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa344PubMedGoogle Scholar
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    1 Comment for this article
    EXPAND ALL
    Effective School Closures During COVID-19
    Michael McAleer, PhD (Econometrics), Queen's | Asia University, Taiwan
    Opening up the economy and society includes essential services and access to education at all levels, which is carefully discussed in this informative Viewpoint by pediatric experts.

    Online learning is feasible at the tertiary level, especially for graduate students, but elementary and secondary (high school) students need encouragement, mentoring, and face-to-face contact to achieve their intellectual potential, especially in a COVID-19 world where isolation can be increasingly restrictive on all members of the community.

    With a high likelihood that COVID-19 will not disappear in the foreseeable future, governments and education authorities need to establish strict rules that govern
    public health safety for school children while they are travelling to and from schools, and activities during school time, including lunches and for any other meals, limiting class sizes, physical distancing, and emphasizing hygiene.

    Further extensive testing is required to determine the likelihood of children being diagnosed as COVID-19 positive in school settings, and the attendant unresolved issue of herd immunity.

    Classes need not be held every week-day, but requiring school children to be home-schooled is infeasible due to economic pressures of working parents, lack of knowledge about effective home schooling, and access to online teaching materials, including computer access, especially at short notice.

    Substantial information regarding effective infection control, transmissibility, attack rates, and deaths have been made available in the more than two months since the pointed Viewpoint was published, but opening up schools remains highly contentious within society.

    Comparisons of COVID-19 with other previous coronaviruses such as SARS will not provide an accurate reflection of the future of the global economy, society, or education at all levels.

    Informed education public policy is especially important for the uncertain lives of today's children, who must be guaranteed physical, emotional, educational, and social support in their formative years.
    CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
    READ MORE
    ×