Abstract:With the emergence of SARS‐CoV‐2 in late 2019, governments worldwide implemented a multitude of non‐pharmaceutical interventions in order to control the spread of the virus. Most countries have implemented measures within the school setting in order to reopen schools or keep them open whilst aiming to contain the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2. For informed decision‐making on implementation, adaptation, or suspension of such measures, it is not only crucial to evaluate their effectiveness with regard to SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission, but also to assess their unintended consequences. To comprehensively identify and map the evidence on the unintended health and societal consequences of school‐based measures to prevent and control the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2. We aimed to generate a descriptive overview of the range of unintended (beneficial or harmful) consequences reported as well as the study designs that were employed to assess these outcomes. This review was designed to complement an existing Cochrane Review on the effectiveness of these measures by synthesising evidence on the implications of the broader system‐level implications of school measures beyond their effects on SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, four non‐health databases, and two COVID‐19 reference collections on 26 March 2021, together with reference checking, citation searching, and Google searches. We included quantitative (including mathematical modelling), qualitative, and mixed‐methods studies of any design that provided evidence on any unintended consequences of measures implemented in the school setting to contain the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic. Studies had to report on at least one unintended consequence, whether beneficial or harmful, of one or more relevant measures, as conceptualised in a logic model. We screened the titles/abstracts and subsequently full texts in duplicate, with any discrepancies between review authors resolved through discussion. One review author extracted data for all included studies, with a second review author reviewing the data extraction for accuracy. The evidence was summarised narratively and graphically across four prespecified intervention categories and six prespecified categories of unintended consequences; findings were described as deriving from quantitative, qualitative, or mixed‐method studies. Eighteen studies met our inclusion criteria. Of these, 13 used quantitative methods (3 experimental/quasi‐experimental; 5 observational; 5 modelling); four used qualitative methods; and one used mixed methods. Studies looked at effects in different population groups, mainly in children and teachers. The identified interventions were assigned to four broad categories: 14 studies assessed measures to make contacts safer; four studies looked at measures to reduce contacts; six studies assessed surveillance and response measures; and one study examined multiple measures combined. Studies addressed a wide range of unintended consequences, most of them considered harmful. Eleven studies investigated educational consequences. Seven studies reported on psychosocial outcomes. Three studies each provided information on physical health and health behaviour outcomes beyond COVID‐19 and environmental consequences. Two studies reported on socio‐economic consequences, and no studies reported on equity and equality consequences. We identified a heterogeneous evidence base on unintended consequences of measures implemented in the school setting to prevent and control the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2, and summarised the available study data narratively and graphically. Primary research better focused on specific measures and various unintended outcomes is needed to fill knowledge gaps and give a broader picture of the diverse unintended consequences of school‐based measures before a more thorough evidence synthesis is warranted. The most notable lack of evidence we found was regarding psychosocial, equity, and equality outcomes. We also found a lack of research on interventions that aim to reduce the opportunity for contacts. Additionally, study investigators should provide sufficient data on contextual factors and demographics in order to ensure analyses of such are feasible, thus assisting stakeholders in making appropriate, informed decisions for their specific circumstances. Why is this question important? Countries worldwide have taken many public health and social measures to prevent and control the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2, a highly contagious respiratory virus responsible for COVID‐19. A range of measures have been put in place to minimise transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2 within schools and the wider community. Schools have the potential to be settings of high viral transmission because they involve extended interactions amongst people in close proximity. A previous review located and examined studies on the effecti -Abstract Truncated-

"Follow the Science" in COVID-19 Policy: A Scoping Review

School closures and reopenings during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review protocol

The role of scientific output in public debates in times of crisis: A case study of the reopening of schools during the COVID-19 pandemic

Supporting the COVID Response with Solutions from Science

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Societal Infection Control Measures on Children and Adolescents' Mental Health: A Scoping Review

Parents' Decisions to Vaccinate Children against COVID-19: A Scoping Review

Unintended consequences of measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review.

Zero-covid advocacy during the COVID-19 pandemic: a case study of views on Twitter/X

Revisiting COVID-19 policies: 10 evidence-based recommendations for where to go from here

Socioscientific Issues Thinking and Action in the Midst of Science-in-the-Making

Unresolved COVID Controversies: 'Normal science' and potential non-scientific influences

Health emergencies, science contrarianism and populism: A scoping review

Decision-making regarding accessing paediatric unscheduled healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods rapid review and thematic synthesis

COVID-19 related interdisciplinary methods: Preventing errors and detecting research opportunities

Scientific Advice and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Revisiting the Asian Disease Problem

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

Mitigating Health and Science Misinformation: A Scoping Review of Literature from 2017 to 2022

The Question of the Origins of COVID-19 and the Ends of Science

Science and policy in the Third Reich: a commentary on history and current relevance

Study Designs to Assess Real-World Interventions to Prevent COVID-19

Changes in the Scientific Information Environment During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Importance of Scientific Situational Awareness in Responding to the Infodemic