School closures pandemic response study favors targeted approach
A Nature Communications model of Dutch COVID-19 spread found closures worked best when matched to the age groups spreading infection.
By Tom Brennan · Health & Medicine Correspondent
3 min read
A new school closures pandemic response study led by UMC Utrecht found that closing schools is most useful when officials target the type of school tied to the age groups spreading infection at that point in an outbreak. The finding matters because school shutdowns can reduce virus spread, while also disrupting children’s education and well-being.
The research, published in Nature Communications, used a mathematical model to reconstruct SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the Netherlands during the COVID-19 pandemic, including spread involving Dutch elementary and secondary schools. UMC Utrecht said researchers from UMC Utrecht, the University of Lisbon and Tilburg University combined epidemiological data with transmission modeling to compare school closure and reopening strategies.
Which schools should close during a pandemic?
The study found that the answer changed over time. According to UMC Utrecht, adults contributed most to transmission early in the pandemic, teenagers became the leading drivers later, and younger children took on a larger role in 2021.
The researchers linked that shift to changes in immunity. By 2021, many adults and teenagers had immunity through vaccination or previous infection, leaving younger children more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection, according to the study.
That changing pattern affected which school policies had the biggest estimated effect. UMC Utrecht said closing secondary schools reduced COVID-19 hospital admissions the most in 2020, while closing elementary schools became more effective near the end of 2021.
The result supports a flexible approach rather than one fixed rule for an entire outbreak. In practical terms, a targeted school closure policy means using current transmission data to decide whether elementary schools, secondary schools or neither should be closed, instead of treating all schools the same throughout a pandemic.
Models can guide faster public health decisions
UMC Utrecht said the work highlights how mathematical models can support public health choices when governments must act before complete information is available. Models can estimate which measures are likely to have the strongest effect before officials impose them.
Ganna Rozhnova, an associate professor in the Infectious Disease Modeling Group at UMC Utrecht and senior author of the study, said school closures carry both disease-control benefits and social costs. “School closures can reduce virus transmission, but they also have major social and educational consequences,” Rozhnova said.
Rozhnova said the findings show that officials can improve decisions by identifying which age groups are driving spread at different points in an outbreak. She said that approach can reduce infections while limiting disruption for children and society.
The researchers plan to expand the model to study wider effects of school interventions, including consequences for children’s learning and development. UMC Utrecht said the team will also examine how social and demographic differences shape disease spread.
The study, titled “Counterfactual evaluation of elementary and secondary school policies in the COVID-19 pandemic,” was authored by Benedetta Canfora and colleagues and published in Nature Communications. UMC Utrecht described the work as part of its modeling group’s continuing research program on outbreak preparedness and evidence for future public health emergencies.
This story draws on original reporting from Medical Xpress.