School Masking Policies and Secondary SARS-CoV-2 Transmission.

OBJECTIVES: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, masking has been a widely used mitigation practice in kindergarten through 12th grade (K-12) school districts to limit within-school transmission. Prior studies attempting to quantify the impact of masking have assessed total cases within schools; however, the metric that more optimally defines effectiveness of mitigation practices is within-school transmission, or secondary cases. We estimated the impact of various masking practices on secondary transmission in a cohort of K-12 schools. METHODS: We performed a multistate, prospective, observational, open cohort study from July 26, 2021 to December 13, 2021. Districts reported mitigation practices and weekly infection data. Districts that were able to perform contact tracing and adjudicate primary and secondary infections were eligible for inclusion. To estimate the impact of masking on secondary transmission, we used a quasi-Poisson regression model. RESULTS: A total of 1 112 899 students and 157 069 staff attended 61 K-12 districts across 9 states that met inclusion criteria. The districts reported 40 601 primary and 3085 secondary infections. Six districts had optional masking policies, 9 had partial masking policies, and 46 had universal masking. In unadjusted analysis, districts that optionally masked throughout the study period had 3.6 times the rate of secondary transmission as universally masked districts; and for every 100 community-acquired cases, universally masked districts had 7.3 predicted secondary infections, whereas optionally masked districts had 26.4. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary transmission across the cohort was modest (<10% of total infections) and universal masking was associated with reduced secondary transmission compared with optional masking.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
UNC Libraries
Published
2025-04-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17615/r1d3-pe32
Primary Topic
COVID-19 and Mental Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

School Masking Policies and Secondary SARS-CoV-2 Transmission.

Jennifer E. Schuster, Kathleen A. McGann, Jennifer L. Goldman, Moira Inkelas et al.
UNC Libraries
COVID-19 and Mental Health
article

School Masking Policies and Secondary SARS-CoV-2 Transmission.

Jennifer E. Schuster, Kathleen A. McGann, Jennifer L. Goldman, Moira Inkelas, Gregory P. DeMuri, Vroselyn Benjamin, Angelique E Boutzoukas, Ibukunoluwa C. Kalu, David J. Weber, M. Alan Brookhart, Tyler Erickson, Andi L. Shane, Jesse Hickerson, Laura Edwards, Shawn Koval, Amy Falk, Sabrina M. Butteris, Vladimir Manuel, Michael J. Smith, Kanecia O Zimmerman
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, masking has been a widely used mitigation practice in kindergarten through 12th grade (K-12) school districts to limit within-school transmission. Prior studies attempting to quantify the impact of masking have assessed total cases within schools; however, the metric that more optimally defines effectiveness of mitigation practices is within-school transmission, or secondary cases. We estimated the impact of various masking practices on secondary transmission in a cohort of K-12 schools. METHODS: We performed a multistate, prospective, observational, open cohort study from July 26, 2021 to December 13, 2021. Districts reported mitigation practices and weekly infection data. Districts that were able to perform contact tracing and adjudicate primary and secondary infections were eligible for inclusion. To estimate the impact of masking on secondary transmission, we used a quasi-Poisson regression model. RESULTS: A total of 1 112 899 students and 157 069 staff attended 61 K-12 districts across 9 states that met inclusion criteria. The districts reported 40 601 primary and 3085 secondary infections. Six districts had optional masking policies, 9 had partial masking policies, and 46 had universal masking. In unadjusted analysis, districts that optionally masked throughout the study period had 3.6 times the rate of secondary transmission as universally masked districts; and for every 100 community-acquired cases, universally masked districts had 7.3 predicted secondary infections, whereas optionally masked districts had 26.4. CONCLUSIONS: Secondary transmission across the cohort was modest (<10% of total infections) and universal masking was associated with reduced secondary transmission compared with optional masking.

UNC Libraries
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
COVID-19 and Mental Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.