In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, 107 countries had implemented national school closures by March 18, 2020. It is unknown whether school measures are effective in coronavirus outbreaks (eg, due to severe acute respiratory syndrome [SARS], Middle East respiratory syndrome, or COVID-19). We undertook a systematic review by searching three electronic databases to identify what is known about the effectiveness of school closures and other school social distancing practices during coronavirus outbreaks. We included 16 of 616 identified articles. School closures were deployed rapidly across mainland China and Hong Kong for COVID-19. However, there are no data on the relative contribution of school closures to 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. Modelling studies of SARS produced conflicting results. Recent modelling studies of COVID-19 predict that school closures alone would prevent only 2-4% of deaths, much less than other social distancing interventions. Policy makers need to be aware of the equivocal evidence when considering school closures for COVID-19, and that combinations of social distancing measures should be considered. Other less disruptive social distancing interventions in schools require further consideration if restrictive social distancing policies are implemented for long periods.

The degree to which children and adolescents are infected by and transmit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is unclear. The role of children and adolescents in transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is dependent on susceptibility, symptoms, viral load, social contact patterns, and behavior. OBJECTIVE To systematically review the susceptibility to and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among children and adolescents compared with adults. DATA SOURCES PubMed and medRxiv were searched from database inception to July 28, 2020, and a total of 13 926 studies were identified, with additional studies identified through hand searching of cited references and professional contacts. STUDY SELECTION Studies that provided data on the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in children and adolescents (younger than 20 years) compared with adults (20 years and older) derived from contact tracing or population screening were included. Single-household studies were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS PRISMA guidelines for abstracting data were followed, which was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Quality was assessed using a critical appraisal checklist for prevalence studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was undertaken. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Secondary infection rate (contact-tracing studies) or prevalence or seroprevalence (population screening studies) among children and adolescents compared with adults. RESULTS A total of 32 studies comprising 41 640 children and adolescents and 268 945 adults met inclusion criteria, including 18 contact-tracing studies and 14 population screening studies. The pooled odds ratio of being an infected contact in children compared with adults was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.37-0.85), with substantial heterogeneity (I 2 = 94.6%). Three school-based contact-tracing studies found minimal transmission from child or teacher index cases. Findings from population screening studies were heterogenous and were not suitable for meta-analysis. Most studies were consistent with lower seroprevalence in children compared with adults, although seroprevalence in adolescents appeared similar to adults. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this meta-analysis, there is preliminary evidence that children and adolescents have lower susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2, with an odds ratio of 0.56 for being an infected contact compared with adults. There is weak evidence that children and adolescents play a lesser role than adults in transmission of SARS-CoV-2 at a population level. This study provides no information on the infectivity of children.

Background Simulation-based medical education enables knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired for all healthcare professionals in a safe, educationally orientated and efficient manner. Procedure-based skills, communication, leadership and team working can be learnt, be measured and have the potential to be used as a mode of certification to become an independent practitioner. Results Simulation-based training initially began with life-like manikins and now encompasses an entire range of systems, from synthetic models through to high fidelity simulation suites. These models can also be used for training in new technologies, for the application of existing technologies to new environments and in prototype testing. The level of simulation must be appropriate to the learners' needs and can range from focused tuition to mass trauma scenarios. The development of simulation centres is a global phenomenon which should be encouraged, although the facilities should be used within appropriate curricula that are methodologically sound and cost-effective. Discussion A review of current techniques reveals that simulation can successfully promote the competencies of medical expert, communicator and collaborator. Further work is required to develop the exact role of simulation as a training mechanism for scholarly skills, professionalism, management and health advocacy.

Objective To establish mortality from pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza up to 8 November 2009.Design Investigation of all reported deaths related to pandemic A/H1N1 in England.Setting Mandatory reporting systems established in acute hospitals and primary care. Participants Physicians responsible for the patient.Main outcome measures Numbers of deaths from influenza combined with mid-range estimates of numbers of cases of influenza to calculate age specific case fatality rates. Underlying conditions, time course of illness, and antiviral treatment.Results With the official mid-range estimate for incidence of pandemic A/H1N1, the overall estimated case fatality rate was 26 (range 11-66) per 100 000. It was lowest for children aged 5-14 (11 (range 3-36) per 100 000) and highest for those aged ≥65 (980 (range 300-3200) per 100 000). In the 138 people in whom the confirmed cause of death was pandemic A/H1N1, the median age was 39 (interquartile range 17-57). Two thirds of patients who died (92, 67%) would now be eligible for the first phase of vaccination in England. Fifty (36%) had no, or only mild, pre-existing illness. Most patients (108, 78%) had been prescribed antiviral drugs, but of these, 82 (76%) did not receive them within the first 48 hours of illness.Conclusions Viewed statistically, mortality in this pandemic compares favourably with 20th century influenza pandemics. A lower population impact than previous pandemics, however, is not a justification for public health inaction. Our data support the priority vaccination of high risk groups. We observed delayed antiviral use in most fatal cases, which suggests an opportunity to reduce deaths by making timely antiviral treatment available, although the lack of a control group limits the ability to extrapolate from this observation. Given that a substantial minority of deaths occur in previously healthy people, there is a case for extending the vaccination programme and for continuing to make early antiviral treatment widely available.

Background The degree to which children and young people are infected by and transmit the SARS-CoV-2 virus is unclear. Clinical series and testing cohorts based upon screening of symptomatic cases provide biased estimates of susceptibility in children. The role of children and young people in transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is dependent on susceptibility, symptoms, viral load, social contact patterns and behaviour. Methods We undertook a rapid systematic review of contact-tracing studies and population-screening studies to address the question What is the susceptibility to and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by children and adolescents compared with adults? We searched PubMed and medRxiv on 16 May 2020 and identified 6327 studies, with additional studies identified through handsearching of cited references (2) and professional contacts (4). We assessed quality, summarized findings and undertook a random effects meta-analysis of contact-tracing studies. Results 18 studies met inclusion criteria; 9 contact-tracing, 8 population-screening and 1 systematic-review. Meta-analysis of contact tracing studies showed that the pooled odds ratio of being an infected contact in children compared with adults for all contact tracing studies was 0.44 (0.29, 0.69) with substantial heterogeneity (63%). Findings from a systematic review of household clusters of COVID-19 found 3/31 (10%) were due to a child index case and a population-based school contact tracing study found minimal transmission by child or teacher index cases. Findings from population-screening studies were heterogenous and not suitable for meta-analysis. Large studies from Iceland, the Netherlands and Spain and an Italian municipal study showed markedly lower SARS-CoV-2 prevalence amongst children and young people, however studies from Stockholm, England and municipalities in Switzerland and Germany showed showed no difference in infection prevalence between adults and children. Conclusions There is preliminary evidence that children and young people have lower susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2, with a 56% lower odds of being an infected contact. There is weak evidence that children and young people play a lesser role in transmission of SARS-CoV-2 at a population level. Our study provides no information on the infectivity of children.

Jean Adams and colleagues argue that population interventions that require individuals to use a low level of agency to benefit are likely to be most effective and most equitable.

Nurse home visits and DMCs decrease all-cause mortality after hospitalization for HF. Along with NCM, they also reduce all-cause readmissions, with no significant difference in comparative effectiveness. These services reduce healthcare system costs to varying degrees.

BACKGROUND Few paediatric cases of COVID-19 have been reported and we know little about the epidemiology in children, though more is known about other coronaviruses. We aimed to understand the infection rate, clinical presentation, clinical outcomes and transmission dynamics for SARS-CoV-2, in order to inform clinical and public health measures. METHODS We undertook a rapid systematic review and narrative synthesis of all literature relating to SARS-CoV-2 in paediatric populations. The search terms also included SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. We searched three databases and the COVID-19 resource centres of eleven major journals and publishers. English abstracts of Chinese language papers were included. Data were extracted and narrative syntheses conducted. RESULTS 24 studies relating to COVID-19 were included in the review. Children appear to be less affected by COVID-19 than adults by observed rate of cases in large epidemiological studies. Limited data on attack rate indicate that children are just as susceptible to infection. Data on clinical outcomes are scarce but include several reports of asymptomatic infection and a milder course of disease in young children, though radiological abnormalities are noted. Severe cases are not reported in detail and there are little data relating to transmission. CONCLUSIONS Children appear to have a low observed case rate of COVID-19 but may have similar rates to adults of infection with SARS-CoV-2. This discrepancy may be because children are asymptomatic or too mildly infected to draw medical attention, be tested and counted in observed cases of COVID-19.