The COVID University Challenge: A Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points Assessment of the Return of Students to Higher Education Establishments

  1. Kelly L. Edmunds
  2. Laura Bowater
  3. Julii Brainard
  4. Jean‐Charles de Coriolis
  5. Iain Lake
  6. Rimsha R. Malik
  7. Lorraine Newark
  8. Neil Ward
  9. Kay Yeoman
  10. Paul R. Hunter

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The COVID‐19 pandemic has disrupted economies and societies throughout the world since early 2020. Education is especially affected, with schools and universities widely closed for long periods. People under 25 years have the lowest risk of severe disease but their activities can be key to persistent ongoing community transmission. A challenge arose for how to provide education, including university level, without the activities of students increasing wider community SARS‐CoV‐2 infections. We used a Hazard Analysis of Critical Control Points (HACCP) framework to assess the risks associated with university student activity and recommend how to mitigate these risks. This tool appealed because it relies on multiagency collaboration and interdisciplinary expertise and yet is low cost, allowing rapid generation of evidence‐based recommendations. We identified key critical control points associated with university student’ activities, lifestyle, and interaction patterns both on‐and‐off campus. Unacceptable contact thresholds and the most up‐to‐date guidance were used to identify levels of risk for potential SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission, as well as recommendations based on existing research and emerging evidence for strategies that can reduce the risks of transmission. Employing the preventative measures we suggest can reduce the risks of SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission among and from university students. Reduction of infectious disease transmission in this demographic will reduce overall community transmission, lower demands on health services and reduce risk of harm to clinically vulnerable individuals while allowing vital education activity to continue. HACCP assessment proved a flexible tool for risk analysis in a specific setting in response to an emerging infectious disease threat. Systematic approaches to assessing hazards and risk critical control points (#HACCP) enable robust strategies for protecting students and staff in HE settings during #COVID19 pandemic.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1111/risa.13741
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.11.20247676: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.12.11.20247676 on medRxiv