School-Academic Partnerships in Support of Safe Return to Schools During the COVID-19 Pandemic

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations ('claims') detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms 'physical distancing' and 'social distancing'. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.

Barriers and Strategies Used to Continue School-Based Health Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To examine perceived barriers and strategies adopted to continue the delivery of school-based health services when schools reopened in Fall of 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic and to assess whether these barriers and strategies varied by locality.

METHODS

We developed and subsequently conducted an online survey of school nurses who worked at the 1178 public elementary schools in Virginia in May 2021 to describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of school-based health services. We compared perceived barriers, strategies adopted and the effectiveness of strategies to continue the delivery of school-based health services by geographic locality (city vs. rural; suburban vs. rural and city vs. suburban).

RESULTS

More than half of schools located in cities expected nine of ten potential barriers to affect the delivery of school-based health services during Fall 2021. More than 50% of responding schools located in urban, suburban and rural area indicated that external barriers outside of their control, including insufficient funding and families not able to bring students to school, were likely to be barriers to delivering care. Strategies identified as "very effective" did not vary by locality. Across all localities, more schools reported virtual strategies were less effective than in-person strategies.

CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE

Lessons from the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic provide critical information for natural disaster and public health emergency preparedness. School locality should be considered in the development of plans to continue the delivery of school-based health services after natural disasters or during public health emergencies.

Summarizing Implementation Support for School-Based COVID-19 Testing Programs in Southwest American Indian Communities

CONTEXT

American Indian communities have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, with school closures exacerbating health and education disparities.

PROGRAM

Project SafeSchools' COVID-19 school-based testing program utilized federal and state funding to provide weekly pooled testing with follow-up rapid antigen testing to students and staff from the White Mountain Apache Tribe and Navajo Nation.

IMPLEMENTATION

The project provided partner schools with training and continual logistical and technical support to aid in school-based testing and adherence to state and local reporting requirements.

EVALUATION

Using the EPIS (Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment) framework, we identified facilitators and barriers to successful program function. While community support and buy-in were essential for successfully implementing school-based testing in these communities, communication, school staff turnover, and funding are among the most significant challenges.

DISCUSSION

Community partnerships in American Indian communities involving schools and local health authorities can successfully implement testing protocols by remaining flexible and working together to maintain strong lines of communication.

An agricultural community's perspectives on COVID-19 testing to support safe school reopening

Introduction

School-based COVID-19 testing may be an effective strategy for reducing transmission in schools and keeping schools open. The study objective was to examine community perspectives on school-based COVID-19 testing as a mitigation strategy to support safe school reopening.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study in Yakima County, an agricultural region of Washington state, where over half of residents are Hispanic/Latino. From June to July 2021, we interviewed 18 students (13 years old, on average) and 19 school employees, and conducted four focus groups (2 in Spanish, 2 in English) with 26 parents. We audio-recorded the semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions which were then transcribed. We used an inductive, constant comparison approach to code the transcripts and conducted a thematic analysis to generate themes.

Results

We identified four main themes. Students, parents, and school employees desired a return to in-person learning (Theme 1). Schools implemented numerous COVID-19 mitigation strategies (e.g., masking) to facilitate a safe return to school but felt that adding testing would not be feasible due to a lack of resources and overworked staff (Theme 2). Parents and school employees' familiarity with COVID-19 testing procedures influenced their support for testing (Theme 3). Parents and school employees felt there were inadequate resources for individuals who test positive for COVID-19 (Theme 4).

Discussion

Schools require adequate resources and medical personnel to implement COVID-19 testing. Individuals also need resources after testing positive, including physical space to isolate, financial resources for those without paid time off, and delivery of food and other necessities to households in rural communities.

At-Home Versus Onsite COVID-19 School-based Testing: A Randomized Noninferiority Trial

OBJECTIVES

Equitable access to coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) screening is important to reduce transmission and maintain in-person learning for middle school communities, particularly in disadvantaged schools. Rapid antigen testing, and at-home testing in particular, could offer substantial advantages over onsite testing from a school district's perspective, but it is unknown if engagement in at-home testing can be initiated and sustained. We hypothesized that an at-home COVID-19 school testing program would be noninferior to an onsite school COVID-19 testing program with regard to school participation rates and adherence to a weekly screening testing schedule.

METHODS

We enrolled 3 middle schools within a large, predominantly Latinx-serving, independent school district into a noninferiority trial from October 2021 to March 2022. Two schools were randomized to onsite and 1 school to at-home COVID-19 testing programs. All students and staff were eligible to participate.

RESULTS

Over the 21-week trial, at-home weekly screening testing participation rates were not inferior to onsite testing. Similarly, adherence to the weekly testing schedule was not inferior in the at-home arm. Participants in the at-home testing arm were able to test more consistently during and before returning from school breaks than those in the onsite arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Results support the noninferiority of at-home testing versus onsite testing both in terms of participation in testing and adherence to weekly testing. Implementation of at-home COVID-19 screening testing should be part of schools' routine COVID-19 prevention efforts nationwide; however, adequate support is essential to ensure participation and persistence in regular at-home testing.