Abstract
In fall 2021 in Finland, the recommendation to use face masks in schools for pupils ages 12 years and above was in place nationwide. Some cities recommended face masks for younger pupils as well. Our aim was to compare COVID-19 incidence among 10–12-year-olds between cities with different recommendations on the use of face masks in schools. COVID-19 case numbers were obtained from the National Infectious Disease Registry (NIDR) of the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, where clinical microbiology laboratories report all positive SARS-CoV-2 tests with unique identifiers in a timely manner, including information such as date of birth, gender, and place of residence. The NIDR is linked to the population data registry, enabling calculation of incidences. We compared the differences in trends of 14-day incidences between Helsinki and Turku among 10–12-year-olds, and for comparison, also among ages 7–9 and 30–49 by using joinpoint regression. According to our analysis, no additional effect seemed to be gained from this, based on comparisons between the cities and between the age groups of the unvaccinated children (10–12 years versus 7–9 years).
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Director of the Department for Health Security of Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare is the competent authority for assessing whether research requires institutional ethical review or if the Finnish communicable diseases law (Tartuntatautilaki 1227/2016) and the law on the duties of the Finnish institute for Health (Laki Terveyden ja hyvinvoinnin laitoksesta 668/2008) and Welfare allows the implementation of the research without seeking further ethical review. Based on his decision this research did not require further ethical review before implementation as its aim was to monitor the effectiveness of specific mitigation measures based on surveillance data (Tartuntatautilaki 1227/2016). The official document including the statement with signature, can be provided if necessary.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
