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 ⏮

Or school staff rather than just teaching staff

Germany’s DIVI intensive care and emergency medicine association is warning of a “dramatic shortage of nurses” as infections surged 11,409 in 24 hours – there’s no shortage of beds, just a lack of 3,500-plus specialists

I thought this was an interesting quote. It shows how statistics can be misleading. Germany has many more ICU beds than any other country in Europe, often shown as therefore being more prepared. However, those beds are useless if they don't have the personnel to cover them. Much like our Nightingales, having bed capacity is only half the story.

Yes, I agree it's more likely to be "situation as of that day" in terms of Teachers off, I think.

The BBC article specifically mentions Teachers, but they could easily be using that a wider catch all.

@Baaaahhhhh now that is interesting. Thank you

"@john_actuary analyses data recently provided by NHS England to estimate the proportion of COVID-19 hospital admissions that were actually acquired within the hospital."

"Using data from hard-hit North West England we estimate that it is no more than 1-in-5."

"We also consider the question of whether people are being hospitalised “with COVID” or “from COVID”. Having considered the age distribution, we estimate that the proportion admitted for other reasons but “with COVID” is no more than 1-in-7."

"It is clearly an issue and that is noted in the paper. However, it is not the driving force behind the increase in admissions, although it is contributing to it. That remains community based infections from those being admitted because of their COVID."

mobile.twitter.com/COVID19actuary/status/1321039546730094599.

www.covid-arg.com/bulletins

Some news on monoclonal antibodies

Clinical trial of Eli Lilly’s anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody in hospitalized COVID-19 patients is stopped.

Investigators stopped enrolling patients in the study after finding LY-CoV555 is unlikely to improve outcomes in the studied patient population.

Eli Lilly said it remains confident LY-CoV555 may prevent the progression of earlier-stage COVID-19 patients.

Regeneron is still enrolling hospitalized COVID-19 patients in a study of REGN-COV2. That study is the most advanced ongoing evaluation of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in hospitalized patients, making it a critical test of whether the modality has a future in the treatment of people with advanced COVID-19.
www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/lilly-s-covid-19-antibody-fails-trial-hospitalized-patients

(Regeneron also part of the UK recovery trials): www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54120753

@CoffeeandCroissant Interesting - I did some maths on that the other day and concluded that in England as a whole, about 16% of Covid "admissions" were hospital acquired, which matches that quite well.

I'm finding my back of the envelope less helpful the more we dive into it.

1. Clearly there's a huge difference between 710 teachers / teaching staff (including TAs) / adults in school. I've pored over the article and it's not totally clear.
2. I'm assuming the staff were the number off on that day, not the total so far (too much lower than community infection rates to be plausible) and not the number testing positive that day (too high, 3882 positive cases that day in NW so 18% would be teachers, not credible given they are

The ONS has released data on characteristics of people testing positive at the end of Sept/ first week or so of Oct. A few highlights:

-Around a third of those who tested positive for COVID-19 reported any evidence of symptoms at the time of their test.

-17- to 24-year-olds have higher positivity rates in both the higher and lower rate regions, however the difference from other age groups is much greater in the higher rate regions.

• Urban areas in England have higher positivity rates than rural areas. 0.70% of the community population in urban areas tested positive and 0.47% in rural areas.

• There was no difference in positivity rates depending on travel abroad.

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19infectionsinthecommunityinengland/october2020

@MRex That TES report seems to be just reporting on what the BBC have published, so given the BBC said Teacher, TES have. I don't think TES have seen the relevant document - that article is essentially a (only barely rewritten!) rehash of the BBC article.

You are right @PatriciaHolm. I'd missed BBC report having 16th as a date and thought they'd also seen the data.

NW had 39,738 cases in those 10 days. 710 = 1.8% of the cases.
Overall England had 140934 positive cases in the 10 days 7th-16th October. 2029 = 1.4% of all cases.
Teacher numbers are tricky because they track back to FTE, but let's agree that doesn't matter if we round numbers. 453,813 teachers in 56m England population = 0.81%
265,167 TAs plus teachers is 718,980 = 1.3%
945,805 staff working in schools = 1.7%.
So, it really matters to understand relative infection risk whether these are teachers, teachers + TAs, or any school staff.
It makes no difference on the inequalities question, because that is most influenced by student absence rates regardless of whether it is because of a student case, teacher case or other isolation.

Interesting regional difference spotted:
England minus North West is 1.3% of all positive cases minus NW positive cases.
So teachers are 28% more likely to be postive in NW compared with everyone else than other parts of the country, are they that much more likely to be tested than general population? Or is this risks remaining very low while cases are low but rising out of proportion when community cases get high? (Can't answer without data for other regions, did we have figures regionally for NI to compare Derry's rate for any similar effect?)

Would one answer be that when cases rise, many workers go back to WFH, whereas teachers can't? So, at that stage , those still in work and without opportunities to SD (so also health staff) become disproportionately exposed?

I think it probably is just teachers because that is what is reported to the DfE : in terms of whether a school can remain open, teacher absence is the critical factor.

Thinking about it, I would expect Teachers to be more likely to test positive than the English population as a whole, simply because they are at work; I would imagine the subset of "people who go out to work" are more likely to test positive that the set of "people who don't", regardless of profession.

We need some better data on positivity rates by profession, in order to actually be able to say statistically that teachers are more likely to test positive than some other professions.

Are you sure about that piggy, our Head has pointed out that numbers of First Aid trained staff or numbers of Site staff are as important, because of H&S rules?

Yes, pretty sure : a form is returned to DfE and to the LA reporting levels of teacher absence.

We definitely do patricia, if only to protect people. Surely to God, someone , somewhere is doing this??

The problem is that relies on people filling in the test request form honestly and completely. Whilst it asks for occupation, you can say none, or lie. Which means the data is incomplete, and unreliable, as to who is getting tested in the community. We can ask people to get admitted to hospital, but what we really need is test stats, and whilst it's perfectly possible to collate them, I'm not sure how much reliance could be put on them.

Right, Northern Ireland - page 35 tracks community rates against school rates, which is very helpful. I can't see any trend between higher positivity & case areas, and higher numbers of school infections (Derry and Belfast high positivity, but Derry has similar rates to community and Belfast much higher rates for school). Now, it's possible that this is hiding a trend for the adult staff, but unlikely. I've played with some numbers and 571 of 19,000 staff in that period is high, but I don't see a correlation with the community infections.

Sorry, posting "no evidence found" on a theory isn't exciting,

All true, although the survey that came out in about May was treated as Biblical truth. Was that the ONS?

ONS did two reports:
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/causesofdeath/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19relateddeathsbyoccupationenglandandwales/deathsregisteredbetween9marchand25may2020
And an addition for lockdown:
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/causesofdeath/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19relateddeathsbyoccupationbeforeandduringlockdownenglandandwales/deathsregisteredbetween9marchand30jun2020

Probably time for teaching unions to step up and ask for evidence. The ONS survey is presumably being done again, but lumping all professionals together is hardly very granular.

The ONS data was about deaths, not tests, unfortunately.

Yes, indeed : probably because of lack of testing back then.

Dashboard is updating so we will have numbers soon.