Data & analysis thread, started 1 December

[NoGoodPunsLeft]

New thread!

Link to previous:

Data and analysis thread, started 12 November www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/4077794-data-and-analysis-thread-started-12-november

A good advert for the lateral flow tests. As they have subsequently developed symptoms they're unlikely to be false positives.

I ordered a batch of LF tests for pre-Xmas testing ( DD in London was worried about seeing GPs).

@DecemberStar I'm not clear exactly what that involves but yes it sounds that way. It's certainly very thought provoking and although I've tested negative (test centre allowed DH to bring an asymptomatic householder) I feel that I'm surely going to get it given how many of DH's colleagues succumbed.

He's isolated in the bedroom since Tuesday evening and I'm finding it very hard to get my head around not seeing him until Christmas Day!

Some more new data due to be added to the dashboard soon - NHS trust as an area type - so can see hospital admissions in more detail. Not sure if capacity will be shown

twitter.com/pouriaaa/status/1339315616726081537?s=21

@cathyandclare yes absolutely. They have been great. Everyone has subsequently had or booked a standard test and so far all have been positive also.

Where did you purchase yours from? I didn't realise you could buy them?

I'll DM you

That’s good to hear about positives. Are false negatives more of an issue?

(I didn’t realise you could buy them either!)

Thank you

@MarshaBradyo possibly. They did two tests for anyone testing positive. But only one test for negatives.

However each negative person has then tested daily using a lateral flow since their initial test and quite a few tested positive the next day, or the day after that- so I guess it is possible that their negatives were false initially.

Chaotic ok thanks that makes sense

However each negative person has then tested daily using a lateral flow since their initial test and quite a few tested positive the next day, or the day after that- so I guess it is possible that their negatives were false initially

They are more accurate with a higher viral load, so that makes sense. The people with lower loads will be less infectious though, so they're still useful.

Even more new data on the dashboard - positivity rates and people tested, and lateral flow tests, down to local authority level (need to filter on an English area to get it to appear)
coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/testing?areaType=ltla&areaName=Trafford

@cathyandclare could you please send me info on how to purchase these too please?

@ceeveebee about time too. I’m not sure why they did not start publish this months ago.

Although as far as I can see they are not yet publishing lateral flow positivity.

The first ONS study of prevalence in schools is out:

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/covid19schoolsinfectionsurveyround1england/november2020

Whilst they are taking great pains to emphasise this is indicative only, and unweighted, what's interesting is that the overall positivity rate in secondary schools over the period (basically 1.5% for students and 1.5% for staff, 95% confidence interval of 1.09-1.97) is pretty close (well within the bounds of statistical significance) of the overall community positivity rate from the overall ONS studies from the same periods.

Infection rates in primaries were lower - 0.75% of pupils, 0.89% of staff (again pretty wide confidence intervals)

The schools study covers 3-19 Nov; the ONS study covering 8-14th suggested 1/80 in England, or 1.25%, of the community population , had Corona.

Obviously, infections have continued apace since then, so the next publication will be more interesting in terms of how this plays out.
105 schools (63 secondary, 42 primary) in 14 local authorities (9 high prevalence, 5 low prevalence) took part in the first round of testing, hence the emphasis on it being indicative only.

[quote ceeveebee]Even more new data on the dashboard - positivity rates and people tested, and lateral flow tests, down to local authority level (need to filter on an English area to get it to appear)
coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/testing?areaType=ltla&areaName=Trafford[/quote]
Thanks for this really interesting for my area which has very localised issues. One area positivity fairly stable, slight uptick, from 4 to 5%, but neighbouring area heading towards 10%, but we know this is down to a large state school, and also indicated by the heavy use of lateral flow tests.

The first ONS study of prevalence in schools is out

It will be interesting to see how this data is spun out on the school boards...... it doesn't really fit the narrative. Runs and hides......

@BigWoollyJumpers

The first ONS study of prevalence in schools is out

It will be interesting to see how this data is spun out on the school boards...... it doesn't really fit the narrative. Runs and hides......

Well; I think the key point is that the data is a month old, and covers the 2 weeks just after half term. We have seen rapid increases in infections in some areas over that period, so I do think the next installment will be more interesting in terms of how the spread manifested itself.

Not making a declaration either way! Just a stats observation.

Are the LF tests harder to administer?

More likely to give false neg if done incorrectly?

I don’t even swab my own dc, they did their own PCR, but is it more likely if they did their own LF they’d mess it up?

Bugger - Tier 3.......

They are not as accurate as PCR if done correctly. I think they're good when used regularly as screening for asymptomatic cases, not as a diagnostic tool for people with symptoms.

The swabbing is much the same ( although just nose) but there's a bit of faffing to process the swab and do the test.

[quote littleowl1]@BanditoShipman
I realise that didnt format very well when I pasted it in so here it is again. Sorry!

01-Dec: 15
02-Dec: 17
03-Dec: 11
04-Dec: 25
05-Dec: 10
06-Dec: 16
07-Dec: 17
08-Dec: 34
09-Dec: 25
10-Dec: 97
11-Dec: 14[/quote]
Thank you so much 🙂🙂🙂

This ONS update was published around the unknown teacher issue

www.ons.gov.uk/news/statementsandletters/onsstatementaddressingquestionsaroundtheanalysisofthenumberofschoolworkerskeyworkersandotherprofessionsinenglandwhohadcovid19

I’d still like to know what ‘other professions’ includes because they all look comparable!

It'll be ISCO-08, they refer to occupational coding and that's what's always used.

[quote ceeveebee]Even more new data on the dashboard - positivity rates and people tested, and lateral flow tests, down to local authority level (need to filter on an English area to get it to appear)
coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/testing?areaType=ltla&areaName=Trafford[/quote]
Thanks for the link Ceeveebee.

Slightly horrified to see my borough has a 17% positivity rate. I had hoped awful numbers were a result of increased testing but apparently not.

www.ons.gov.uk/methodology/classificationsandstandards/standardoccupationalclassificationsoc/soc2020 - here's the detail. It's basically anyone with a degree.