4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Experiences and consequences of remote schooling during the Covid-19 pandemic for children and youth in the Nordic countries: a scoping review

      1 , 1 , 1 , 1
      London Review of Education
      UCL Press

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Between March 2020 and March 2022, the Covid-19 pandemic led to societal lockdowns and school closures worldwide. The length of school closures varied from a few weeks to many months. We summarise the experiences and consequences of remote schooling during the pandemic on children and youth in the Nordic countries. We conducted a systematic scoping review, including longitudinal, qualitative and mixed-methods studies. The methods involved predetermined selection criteria, an extensive literature search, independent screening of references and a narrative summary of findings. We included 20 studies (in 21 reports), from Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland. There were 7 longitudinal, 7 qualitative and 6 mixed-methods studies. The studies covered primary, lower and upper secondary education. The studies that collected data at the beginning of the pandemic in spring 2020, when most schools in the Nordic countries had been closed for a few weeks, showed variations in how children and youth experienced remote schooling. Many students (and teachers) experienced subjective learning gaps. Lower well-being was reported among students on all educational levels during the period of remote schooling, although some students thrived in this period. Factors that might predispose children and youth for negative consequences of the pandemic are socio-economic background, immigrant background and learning difficulties. The extensive shift to remote schooling for children and youth during the pandemic yielded important consequences that should be considered in the preparation for future pandemics or similar crises.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

          Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps. Although more scoping reviews are being done, their methodological and reporting quality need improvement. This document presents the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist and explanation. The checklist was developed by a 24-member expert panel and 2 research leads following published guidance from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. The final checklist contains 20 essential reporting items and 2 optional items. The authors provide a rationale and an example of good reporting for each item. The intent of the PRISMA-ScR is to help readers (including researchers, publishers, commissioners, policymakers, health care providers, guideline developers, and patients or consumers) develop a greater understanding of relevant terminology, core concepts, and key items to report for scoping reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Scoping studies: advancing the methodology

              Background Scoping studies are an increasingly popular approach to reviewing health research evidence. In 2005, Arksey and O'Malley published the first methodological framework for conducting scoping studies. While this framework provides an excellent foundation for scoping study methodology, further clarifying and enhancing this framework will help support the consistency with which authors undertake and report scoping studies and may encourage researchers and clinicians to engage in this process. Discussion We build upon our experiences conducting three scoping studies using the Arksey and O'Malley methodology to propose recommendations that clarify and enhance each stage of the framework. Recommendations include: clarifying and linking the purpose and research question (stage one); balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process (stage two); using an iterative team approach to selecting studies (stage three) and extracting data (stage four); incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis, reporting results, and considering the implications of study findings to policy, practice, or research (stage five); and incorporating consultation with stakeholders as a required knowledge translation component of scoping study methodology (stage six). Lastly, we propose additional considerations for scoping study methodology in order to support the advancement, application and relevance of scoping studies in health research. Summary Specific recommendations to clarify and enhance this methodology are outlined for each stage of the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Continued debate and development about scoping study methodology will help to maximize the usefulness and rigor of scoping study findings within healthcare research and practice.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                London Review of Education
                UCL Press
                1474-8479
                February 1 2024
                November 27 2024
                : 22
                : 1
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Reviews and Health Technology Assessments, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
                Article
                10.14324/LRE.22.1.39
                c9edc0f0-8be0-4675-bcab-a02796dd574d
                © 2024

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content220

                Most referenced authors640