Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 3

[Barracker]

Welcome to thread 3 of the daily updates.

Resource links:
Worldometer UK page
Financial Times Daily updates and graphs
HSJ Coronavirus updates
Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Centre
NHS England stats, including breakdown by Hospital Trust
Covidly.com to filter graphs using selected data filters
ONS statistics for CV related deaths outside hospitals, released weekly each Tuesday

Thank you to all contributors for their factual, data driven, and civil discussions.

know that sounds cold and callous, but data analysis often is. The deaths in care homes and at home do matter in terms of long term tracking of the pandemic. But in prioritising, these are not important statistics for the government to track in order to manage the live situation we are in.

It should be though, as in some reported cases they are expecting non medically trained care workers to put themselves at risk and care for people until the end with an infectious disease as if they were medical staff because no medical staff will be made available. So yes it does sound callous. It's not just about data, it's about the NHS's responsibility to treat people with an infectious disease. And where they fail, that really needs to be recorded.

it's about the NHS's responsibility to treat people with an infectious disease.

And the government's responsibility to minimise vulnerable people being put at risk. That data might not be convenient, but it might be needed to hold people to account.

Actually that Reuter’s article ties in with the attitude to data on cases and deaths outside hospitals.

Scientists advising the U.K. government thought they knew the answers already. They thought it was like a flu pandemic and thought the only option was to ride it out advising those affected to stay at home and hundreds of thousands of deaths were inevitable.
They didn’t look at other data and didn’t even model a lockdown.

They stopped testing and tracing against WHO advise because they thought it wouldn’t work. And now think they have to learn from Germany who did follow the advice.

If they are only looking at hospital data now and not pushing to get other data on a timely basis they are making decisions without full information.

That's an interesting way of framing it that I hadn't thought about before.

Ereshkigalangcleg your points on ethics are valid for another thread, not this one which is only interested in the data.

I don't mean any personal attack or offence in saying that. I'm not looking to discuss the ethics, was just explaining the data collection.

So yes it does sound callous. It's not just about data

This thread is only about data.

you have to know where the disease is and control it

That was the "contain phase" when testing focused on finding carriers and contact tracing Inniu. There was a distinct change after we left the contain phase when testing swapped to hospital admissions only. The focus at that point- as it is now - is soley on ensuring the peak does not overwhelm the NHS.

Ensuring NHS capacity is the only factor the government are currently prioritising. Which is why all focus on hospital patients only in the data.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Non-hospital deaths are recorded.

They are included in the ONS data on death certificates registered which include COVID-19 in the cause of death.

These are not time-sensitive data released though. Will be useful for retrospectively looking at the pandemic progress, but not useful to inform governmental policy in a fast moving environment which needs daily figures.

I think the “only test hospital cases at this stage” was always only the U.K. approach, not best practice, and is out of date even in the U.K now.

This is why the UK wants to be at 100,000 tests a day.

Saving the NHS is only one goal, saving lives is, it should be,another.

Lifting the lockdown while saving the NHS and saving lives has to be the end goal.
Timely testing of everyone is needed for that.

A discussion about data can’t just be about the data you have it should also be about the data you need and the fact it is absent.

I would imagine when moving into the next phase - reducing lockdown - that the data focus may change at that point.

At the current time in crisis management, the government's priority is not overwhelming the NHS.

So going back to my post - Why are deaths at home and in nursing homes not included in daily data. The answer is most likely because these deaths are irrelevant to the current priority of not exceeding hospital capacity / flattening the curve.

The government have been really clear on that as a priority right from the start. The rights and wrongs this priority could be discussed to the nth degree. I'm not disagreeing with you Inniu. Just answering a question regarding why certain data isn't being included.

Ereshkigalangcleg your points on ethics are valid for another thread, not this one which is only interested in the data.

I don't mean any personal attack or offence in saying that. I'm not looking to discuss the ethics, was just explaining the data collection.

It's your personal opinion that the data isn't relevant. I disagree.

The NHS Act 2006 mandates that the views of patients and the public should inform all NHS healthcare. The quality of care of people the NHS are avoiding treating because they are left in care homes (also covered by the DHSC) is not something that can just be handwaved away as irrelevant.

A discussion about data can’t just be about the data you have it should also be about the data you need and the fact it is absent.

Absolutely.

It is government's decision that community deaths are not included in daily figures. Not my decision. At no point have I expressed an opinion.

You're missing the point. It's your opinion that that missing data isn't relevant, based on your personal perception. Other people disagree.

That is not my opinion.

What is your opinion then?

your points on ethics are valid for another thread, not this one which is only interested in the data.

I'm talking about data.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13619020

What is your opinion then?

(1) That all deaths of COVID-19 are should be recorded (and are relevent)
(2) That all suspected cases of coronavirus should be tested.
(3) That all test results should be recorded
(4) That all the above should be done within 24h and published to the public.

However:
(A) I'm not in the government.
(B) I have not given any consideration to the cost of this (probably vast)
(C) I have not considered the realistic ability to achieve these

Ereshkigalangcleg - you seem to have misinterpreted my earlier post about community deaths as an emotionally driven response. It was not. I do not think any deaths are irrelevant. I pointed out that non-hospital deaths are irrelevant to a data study on hospital capacity. Not that "I" think these deaths irrelevant personally. Very, very different thing.

It's not just about hospital capacity for the government. There are other considerations which require data. That's the whole point. I think we're talking at cross purposes.

The government is also responsible for care homes. The same CQC that gives ratings to NHS trusts on patient care, gives ratings to care homes on how they care for the vulnerable adults in their care. It really isn't irrelevant data for the government when people are dying of this infectious disease in care homes where the NHS is not treating them. And they do need to know where there are hotspots.

I think we're talking at cross purposes

Yes, I think we are.

I think you've misinterpreted things I've said, as much as I have you.

Surely care home deaths are relevant because some of those cases probably should have been sent to hospital? If hospitals weren't trying to restrict the people coming in?

Care home coronavirus deaths are recorded by the government.

The Office of National Statistics collate data on all deaths in England and Wales, including all deaths that have COVID-19 written on the death certificate, regardless of the place or manner of death. This will include care home deaths and deaths at home. This data is published weekly and has a time delay, but is nonetheless recorded.

A seperate data study, running alongside ONS data but collating data in a different way, is focused only on the priority of flattening the curve with the specific aim of not overwhelming NHS capacity at the peak. This is the data published daily. Non-hospital deaths are not recorded in this. That makes logical and statistical sence since non-hospital deaths have nil effect on hospital capacity.

Surely care home deaths are relevant because some of those cases probablyshouldhave been sent to hospital? If hospitals weren't trying to restrict the people coming in?

Yeah. They'll be loads of deaths at home which fall under the same category, I would imagine.

What the government is trying to do by making sure the NHS has beds and capacity is to ensure that no one ever has to be turned away from a hospital if a hospital bed is requested.

So as long as the NHS maximum is not breached, there will be beds for those in care homes or at home if they want / need that bed.

I'm not in hospital logistics but I'd imagine such patients may have to travel longer distances to find beds, but the whole point if this policy and data tracking is so that those hospital beds are there for everyone who needs to be admitted.