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-

Secondary infections of COVID-19 in schools and the effectiveness of school-based interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Risk of infection and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among children and adolescents in households, communities and educational settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Prevalence and Risk Factors for School-Associated Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

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

What is the specific role of schools and daycares in COVID-19 transmission? A final report from a living rapid review

What do we know about SARS-CoV-2 transmission? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the secondary attack rate, serial interval, and asymptomatic infection

Transmissibility and pathogenicity of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2: A systematic review and meta-analysis of secondary attack rate and asymptomatic infection

School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including COVID-19: a rapid systematic review

Pilot Investigation of SARS-CoV-2 Secondary Transmission in Kindergarten Through Grade 12 Schools Implementing Mitigation Strategies - St. Louis County and City of Springfield, Missouri, December 2020

Comprehensive and safe school strategy during COVID-19 pandemic

The Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in Community Indoor Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Effectiveness of public health measures in reducing the incidence of covid-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and covid-19 mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis

SARS-CoV-2 Infections and Incidence at a North Carolina Pre-Kindergarten-12 School During In-Person Education: August 2020 to January 2021

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

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by children to contacts in schools and households: a prospective cohort and environmental sampling study in London

A multi‐layered strategy for COVID‐19 infection prophylaxis in schools: A review of the evidence for masks, distancing, and ventilation

Simulation-Based Estimation of SARS-CoV-2 Infections Associated With School Closures and Community-Based Nonpharmaceutical Interventions in Ontario, Canada

SARS-CoV-2 and the role of close contact in transmission: a systematic review

Staff-Pupil SARS-CoV-2 Infection Pathways in Schools: A Population Level Linked Data Approach

Prevalence of risk behaviors and correlates of SARS-CoV-2 positivity among in-school contacts of confirmed cases in a Georgia school district in the pre-vaccine era, December 2020-January 2021

Non-Pharmacological Interventions During SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: Effects on Pediatric Viral Respiratory Infections