Pure data thread #1: Daily numbers, graphs, focused analyses

[BigChocFrenzy]

This is pure data, NOT for the "worried about Corona"

We welcome calm factual, data-driven contributions
Please try to keep discussion focused on these and avoid emotional venting or politics
📈 📉 📊 👍

Resource links

UK:
Uk dashboard R, deaths, cases, hospitals, tests - by postcode, 4 nations, English regions, LAs
Interactive 7-day rolling cases map click on map or by postcode
UK govt pressers Slides & data
SAGE Table Interventions with impacts and R
Imperial UK weekly tables & extrapolations LAs, cases / 100k, table, map, hotspots
School statistics Attendance - Tuesdays
ICNRC Intensive Care National Audit & Research reports
UK testing and NHS England track & trace - Thursdays
ONS Roundup deaths, infections & economic reports
ONS England, Wales & NI Infection surveillance report - Fridays
ONS Datasets for surveillance reports
Our World in Data UK test positivity
R estimates & daily growth UK & English regions - Fridays
Modelling real number of UK infections February in first wave

England:
NHS England Hospital activity
NHS England Daily deaths
PHE COVID Clinical Risk Factors Non-respiratory by region, area, district etc
Cases Tracker England Local Government
PHE surveillance reports Covid, flu, respiratory diseases - Thursdays
CovidMessenger live update by council district in England

Scotland, Wales, NI:
Scot gov Daily data
Scotland TravellingTabby LAs, care homes, hospitals, tests, t&t
PH Wales LAs, tests, ONS deaths
NI Dashboard

COVID-19 Risk Factors
Alama Personal COVID risk assessment
PHE Clinical RFs - summary & social vulnerability indicators
PHE Clinical RFs - respiratory disease
PHE Clinical RFs - non-respiratory - CVD,T1, T2, obesity, flu jab coverage
PHE Non-Clinical RFs - deprivation, demography, economic inactivity, ethnicity
PHE Non-Clinical RFs - Vulnerable Groups (1): care / nursing home, MH, visual disabilities
PHE Non-Clinical RFs - homeless, children in care, ESL

Miscell:
Zoe Uk data
ECDC rolling 14-day incidence EEA & UK
Worldometer UK page
FT DIY graphs compare deaths, cases, raw / million pop
Local Mobility Reports for countries
UK Highstreet Tracker for cities & large towns Footfall, spend index, workers, visitors, economic recovery
NHS Triage Dashboard Pathways - triages of symptoms
NHS Triage Dashboard Progression - # people pillar 1&2, # triages

⏭ Our STUDIES Corner ⏮

I read Reds posts as being from someone who is massively frustrated and angry with the situation and that this is coming through in her posts.
It could also seem aggressive and maybe aimed against other posters but I'm not sure this is intended.
It is notoriously difficult to read tone in text comment
I feel massively stressed and angry about many ways this Covid situation has been managed. I can easily feel angry with another poster who seems to minimising something that I think is important.
It is really easy to react angrily or even just snippily.
Can I suggest that we try and think about the tone our posts might be read in and try and word things to reduce the likelihood of them being read aggressively but also give other posters the benefit of the doubt if they seem aggressive and focus on the thrust of their data/argument rather than their tone ( perceived or otherwise)
If we don't, then the thread will just deteriorate into the negative arguments we see so often on other threads.
We can disagree about the relevance or interpretation of data or the rigour of a particular study but why don't we try to stay away from personal disagreement?

I agree with arti but I would also state (especially since the OP has gone for the meantime) that no one is in charge of this thread and no one is boss. We don't need a power struggle of people policing each other's responses or posts . It is OK to correct the misinformed, of course, or counter arguments in the spirit of healthy debate.

I think we need to steer ourselves away from power struggles and back to the discussion of facts and figures.

I am aware of the slight hypocrisy of me saying no one is boss and then being a bit bossy!

Well said Arti.

I also think it's easy sometimes to end up unconsciously directing all the frustration some of us may be feeling at people's attitudes /ignorance etc in RL, into one reply to something on MN which perhaps (for us at that moment) exemplifies what we disagree with.

Letting off steam, essentially.

We can be informed, seeking to educate others, and kind. But we all get it wrong sometimes.

My point: councils and nhs trusts should be routinely reporting this is these are the key data points that trigger / release us from lockdowns.

I suspect the decision to put areas in various Tiers is far far more complex that we can summarise in a few bits of key data, and even if we did have a nice table that showed, for example, cases/growth/bed occupancy/ICU occupancy (for example) it still wouldn't be clear cut.

Decisions on local areas are, I would imagine, also taking in account a whole host of other data that may well differ by area; heat maps and cluster analysis of outbreaks, local socioeconomic demographics, population density and movement, current council involvement and action, council budgets....etc.

I do completely agree that there needs to be more honesty and clarity, including the path out of restrictions (as South Yorks are calling for today). I suspect the route to that comes more from empowering local Govt to speak, rather than a Central Govt no-one trusts anymore .
To completely change the Subject, and back onto data - US have reported highest daily cases, at 83,010. Northern/Mid West really suffering now.

A graph of this by Republican vs Democrat states would be interesting.. Someone must have done that...

Chart showing share of beds at each hospital trust occupied by covid patients.
mobile.twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1319886458195480576

Larger version:
pbs.twimg.com/media/ElEtmAOUYAI4zrB?format=png&name=4096x4096

Worth mentioning that that US map is cases per million not 100,000!

"I suspect the decision to put areas in various Tiers is far far more complex that we can summarise in a few bits of key data, and even if we did have a nice table that showed, for example, cases/growth/bed occupancy/ICU occupancy (for example) it still wouldn't be clear cut.

Decisions on local areas are, I would imagine, also taking in account a whole host of other data that may well differ by area; heat maps and cluster analysis of outbreaks, local socioeconomic demographics, population density and movement, current council involvement and action, council budgets....etc."

Well maybe, but I am not convinced No 10 is doing this at a remotely rigorous level. If they were, they would be able to explain their decisions better. Totally agree that the best approach now is empowering local government to speak on this rather than No 10 (though I'm not sure that accepting Essex CC's request to go into Tier 2 despite their relatively low case numbers was a great idea).

@Augustbreeze

Worth mentioning that that US map is cases per million not 100,000!

Ah yes good spot - though it's also daily, whereas I think here we tend to refer to it on a weekly basis.

So for example, Montana at 656/1,000,000 on a daily basis is the same as 459/100,000 on a weekly basis. UK is about 200.

@PatriciaHolm

My point: councils and nhs trusts should be routinely reporting this is these are the key data points that trigger / release us from lockdowns.

I suspect the decision to put areas in various Tiers is far far more complex that we can summarise in a few bits of key data, and even if we did have a nice table that showed, for example, cases/growth/bed occupancy/ICU occupancy (for example) it still wouldn't be clear cut.

Decisions on local areas are, I would imagine, also taking in account a whole host of other data that may well differ by area; heat maps and cluster analysis of outbreaks, local socioeconomic demographics, population density and movement, current council involvement and action, council budgets....etc.

I do completely agree that there needs to be more honesty and clarity, including the path out of restrictions (as South Yorks are calling for today). I suspect the route to that comes more from empowering local Govt to speak, rather than a Central Govt no-one trusts anymore .
To completely change the Subject, and back onto data - US have reported highest daily cases, at 83,010. Northern/Mid West really suffering now.

A graph of this by Republican vs Democrat states would be interesting.. Someone must have done that...

I think you are more forgiving and optimistic on that than i am!

I do think there are ways in which things could be framed to the public in a much better way which are measurable but without causing alarm.

Last week there were lots of news reports about the situation at Warrington General which weren't pleasant, so the idea that people would somehow be more alarmed by data is a little silly. If anything the data does the opposite in trying to put this into context.

Given that the local paper and hospital has been publishing this data in on a daily basis, without it causing abject panic, im inclined to think that its not a huge issue.

With regards to hospitals, im not sure there is a willingness to point out how close to occupancy they run at under normal circumstances which is why there is a reluctance to publish on that level in most cases. Why Halton and Warrington NHS Trust decided to buck this trend and publish daily figures do some time ago before there was a ever an uptick is an interesting question.

All these local lockdowns everywhere has only led to people being puzzled at whats happening around them. This has only started to be an issue outside the North in the last week but its been ongoing here for months.

This is going to start affecting other areas of the country more as its a tension point. And the difficulty in managing this is important and has to come from data sets or you get resentment building up.

This is where the data is heading and what people need to know to understand better.

Actual deaths are almost irrelevant on this level at this point, because in real time terms its about ensuring the situation is managed to the best we can with the resources available to minimise damage further rather than being about eradication and suppression, because we've already crossed where wackamole is possible in most places. That data is only useful in retrospect and for comparison with other places but not for where we now find ourselves.

@IrenetheQuaint

"I suspect the decision to put areas in various Tiers is far far more complex that we can summarise in a few bits of key data, and even if we did have a nice table that showed, for example, cases/growth/bed occupancy/ICU occupancy (for example) it still wouldn't be clear cut.

Decisions on local areas are, I would imagine, also taking in account a whole host of other data that may well differ by area; heat maps and cluster analysis of outbreaks, local socioeconomic demographics, population density and movement, current council involvement and action, council budgets....etc."

Well maybe, but I am not convinced No 10 is doing this at a remotely rigorous level. If they were, they would be able to explain their decisions better. Totally agree that the best approach now is empowering local government to speak on this rather than No 10 (though I'm not sure that accepting Essex CC's request to go into Tier 2 despite their relatively low case numbers was a great idea).

I agree with this.

Found this on Twitter which may be of interest; % of beds at each hospital trust that are occupied by Covid patients -

pbs.twimg.com/media/ElEtmAOUYAI4zrB?format=png&name=4096x4096

ranges from 27.4% in Blackpool to 0 for a Sheffield Children's Hospital.

Of course, this needs to be combined with the total capacity and % of beds currently filled with non-Covid patients to give a full picture. However, for example, Blackpool Teaching Hospitals Trust appears to have been around 65% full this time last year; adding another 28% onto that, you can see the issue ..

(I know it's not as simple as that; some of that 28% will have been in hospital already, it's not simple additive. But it does give an idea of the scale of the possible problem in some areas.)

@PatriciaHolm yes I liked that (and all the heat maps around. Makes it so easy to compare)

I just wish they updated the hospital activity data more often. Once a month isn't a lot to get a current picture in this fast moving time. That data is from 1st October....

We just have to settle for the regional data but that is so broad.

Re UK Gyms, (Scotland)
We have a family member who owns one. They received a visit from environmental health this morning.
Passed their inspection and were impressed with the protocols in place, extremely safe for their members.
One thing they have asked them to add to protocols not previously mentioned in them, that masks be worn when leaving one piece of equipment to the next. Similar to moving around in a resto.

@PatriciaHolm

Found this on Twitter which may be of interest; % of beds at each hospital trust that are occupied by Covid patients -

pbs.twimg.com/media/ElEtmAOUYAI4zrB?format=png&name=4096x4096

ranges from 27.4% in Blackpool to 0 for a Sheffield Children's Hospital.

Of course, this needs to be combined with the total capacity and % of beds currently filled with non-Covid patients to give a full picture. However, for example, Blackpool Teaching Hospitals Trust appears to have been around 65% full this time last year; adding another 28% onto that, you can see the issue ..

(I know it's not as simple as that; some of that 28% will have been in hospital already, it's not simple additive. But it does give an idea of the scale of the possible problem in some areas.)

See now thats more like whats needed to get an idea of things. Its interesting where which certain hospitals sit on that list and how they compare to elsewhere.

I just feel that since weve moved from 'whackamole' strategy to supress cases to 'hospital bed crisis management' strategy in many areas which need to be getting information a bit like this, to see where we sit in terms of the problems. It makes a whole lot more sense that way.

Thats actually not a bad format.

Thank you thats brilliant, and i do think it illustrates where and why my concerns and frustrations have been as they have been.

Where are todays figures then

This data sure takes some unpicking:

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/coronavirus-mutating-patients-dying-quicker-22897987?fbclid=IwAR0ucg90InCdyIrDMr1vYelM53zlqyP7zN0LcWfu9CVnykATI_4DA4TAGyw

Blimey patricia my eyes aren't up to reading that!

@Piggywaspushed

Blimey patricia my eyes aren't up to reading that!

On a laptop you can click on it to expand! V hard on a mobile though...

Aha!

Oh yes, that hospital list is v helpful. Almost all the top spots occupied by the southern north-west (as it were), which certainly demonstrates the level of the problem there.

19332 cases in England, website updating

23012 and 174 deaths in uk, seems high for the weekend

Cases today 23,012
Deaths 174

Another big chunk of cases from just a couple of days ago; continuing this weeks' trend.

Means 19th is, whilst still a slight spike, not looking like such an stark outlier; currently in England, 19th - 21,461, 20th - 18,452 (but likely to still go up 1,000 or so).

@herecomesthsun

23012 and 174 deaths in uk, seems high for the weekend

it's usually the Sunday and Monday that are low rather than the Saturday.

Last Sat was 150. (Sunday was 67 and Monday 80)

I'm feeling low about this. It seems to me we aren't getting the levelling off we thought might be happening!