Many updates, check it out.
Here are some highlights:
1
Our coverage increased from 79 countries and territories in the previous version to 89 and the time frame covered increased substantially, with many countries already reporting 2021 data.
2
We extended the introduction a bit, showcasing the vast historical usage of excess mortality in epidemiology - this method is not new at all and is extremely well established.
3
Some countries deaths counts are better than others, but our data is self-consistent as pre-covid 2020 deaths match well to 2015-2019 deaths and our 2020 forecast.
Could the true excess mortality be different there? Yes. But if anything, it's prob. HIGHER than our findings.
4
Our model for estimating excess deaths strikes the right balance between overly simplistic methods and more elaborate methods such as the Farrington model, and it allows estimation of CIs to asses statistical significance.
5
We have updated our "leaderboard" according to 4 different measures of excess mortality, each reveals a different dimension of the extent of COVID, excess deaths and the relation between them.
6
Even with more up to date data, countries without or with minor COVID spreads have experienced either mortality DEFICITIS (less than expected) or a statistically not-signficiant higher/lower counts (denoted as n.s.).
This version and the constant updates of our data and analysis would not be possible without the feedback, discussion and contributions of many people.
It's important no to extrapolate from incomplete data into now. Uruguay for example, has had almost no COVID deaths up to August (our latest data point), and even up to December, but has seen a steep rise since. Same for Czechia, which had no COVID and no excess up to October.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@OrsolaTorrisi_ and I estimate the war led to ~6,500 excess deaths among people aged 15–49:
~2,800 in Armenia
~3,400 in Azerbaijan
and 310 in de facto Artsakh.
Deaths were highly concentrated among late adolescent and young adult males, suggesting that most excess mortality was directly related to combat.
2
For small countries like Armenia (pop ~3 million) and Azerbaijan (~10 million), such loss of young men represents a considerable long-term cost for future demographic, economic, and social development.
It's often argued that in the absence of all-cause-mortality data to directly estimate excess deaths, we should rely on the officially reported covid-19 data. This is false, as we explain here
It is high time that countries, regions and the world report all-cause-mortality in (as close to) real time as possible.
This will help prevent future outbreaks from evolving to an epidemic and then a pandemic.
Vital Registration is VITAL.
I have officially submitted a request to retract Motallebi et al (2022) from @AmJPrevMed.
There are many conceptual and practical issues with the analysis, but the most important one is miscoding of countries into "masking yes/no" groups.
1
The paper codes Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, UK into the "no masking policy" group during the 1st COVID wave.
This is plainly false, not just by examining data on masking policies but by anyone who lives in or was in Italy for example.
2
Another issue is that the study essentially compares countries that had COVID during the 1st wave to countries without, wrongly attributing difference in deaths to policy...
This is a terrible study.
The sample period is only February 15 to May 31st 2020.
Many countries in the "yes mask policy" are countries with literally NO COVID SPREAD (as evident from both reported cases/deaths and lack of excess mortality)...
PM contains data which doesn't fit into World Mortality or Local Mortality for various reasons such as time format (not weekly, monthly or quarterly), un-official status, projections, early releases of more detailed data forthcoming, etc.
Each datum source, properties and limitations is listed below. As the time format varies substantially, each source is provided as a separate csv file.
אני רואה ששוב ושוב מפיצים את התרשים מהמחקר שלנו בנוגע להתחלקות הוצאות מדינה ומיסים על פני משקי בית בישראל.
זה מאוד מחמם את הלב אבל אשמח אם תזכרו שהוא טרם פורסם ועד ייתכנו בו שינויים, אם כי התמונה הגדולה לא תשתנה הרבה.
1
אישית אני חושב שזה אחד המחקרים החשובים ביותר שעבדתי עליהם ואני שמח לראות שיש לו תהודה גדולה עוד לפני שפורסם.
מאז שעזבתי את קהלת לכבוד הדוקטורט לקחו את המושכות שלו ביתר חבריי לפורום ולגבי השאלה "מתי תפרסמו" התשובה היא "when it's ready".
2
הסבר קטן לגבי מה רואים פה:
המחקר אומד על בסיס סקר הוצ' משק הבית את תשלומי משקי הבית על מס הכנסה, דמי ביטוח לאומי ובריאות (גם "חלק מעסיק", שאינו מופיע ישירות בסקר ונאמד בעזרת ההכנסה ברוטו מעבודה ולוחות הניכוי של המוסד לבט"ל)...