Data, Stats and Daily Numbers started 6th April 2021

[boys3]

UK govt pressers Slides & data www.gov.uk/government/collections/slides-and-datasets-to-accompany-coronavirus-press-conferences#history
Data Dashboard coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
Covid 19 Genomics www.cogconsortium.uk/tools-analysis/public-data-analysis-2/
NHS Vaccination data www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/
Global vaccination data ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations
R estimates UK & English regions www.gov.uk/guidance/the-r-number-in-the-uk
Imperial UK weekly LAs, cases / 100k, table, map, hotspots statistics imperialcollegelondon.github.io/covid19local/#map
NHS England Hospital activity www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/
NHs England Daily deaths www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/
Cases Tracker England Local Government lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/view/lga-research/covid-19-case-tracker
ONS MSAO Map English deaths www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/
CovidMessenger live update by council area in England www.covidmessenger.com/
Scot gov Daily data www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-daily-data-for-scotland/
Scotland TravellingTabby LAs, care homes, hospitals, tests, t&t www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavirus-tracker/
PH Wales LAs, cases, tests, deaths Dashboard public.tableau.com/profile/public.health.wales.health.protection#!/vizhome/RapidCOVID-19virology-Public/Headlinesummary
ICNRC Intensive Care National Audit & Research reports www.icnarc.org/Our-Audit/Audits/Cmp/Reports
NHS t&t England & UK testing Weekly stats www.gov.uk/government/collections/nhs-test-and-trace-statistics-england-weekly-reports
PHE Surveillance reports & LA Local Watchlist Maps by LSOA (from last summer) www.gov.uk/government/collections/nhs-test-and-trace-statistics-england-weekly-reports
ONS England infection surveillance report each Friday www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/previousReleases
Datasets for ONS surveillance reports www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/datasets/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveydata/2020
ONS Roundup deaths, infections & economic reports www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19roundup/2020-03-26
Zoe UK data covid.joinzoe.com/data#interactive-map
ECDC (European Centre for Disease Control) rolling 14-day incidence EEA & UK www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/cases-2019-ncov-eueea

Worldometer UK page www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
Our World in Data GB test positivity etc, DIY country graphs ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/united-kingdom?country=~GBR
FT DIY graphs compare deaths, cases, raw / million pop ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=eur&areas=usa&areas=bra&areas=gbr&areas=cze&areas=hun&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&areasRegional=usaz&areasRegional=usca&areasRegional=usnd&areasRegional=ussd&cumulative=0&logScale=0&per100K=1&startDate=2020-09-01&values=deaths

PHE local health data fingertips.phe.org.uk/profile/health-profiles
Alama Personal COVID risk assessment alama.org.uk/covid-19-medical-risk-assessment/
Local Mobility Reports for countries www.google.com/covid19/mobility/
UK Highstreet Tracker for cities & large towns Footfall, spend index, workers, visitors, economic recovery www.centreforcities.org/data/high-streets-recovery-tracker/

⏭ Our STUDIES Corner ⏮ www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/3869571-Studies-corner?msgid=99913434

We welcome factual, data driven and analytical contributions
Please try to keep discussion focused on these

Does anyone have any insights into the advantages/disadvantages of having a different vaccine for the second one? I'm tempted to apply for the new trial as I'm in the right age and period-post-first-vaccine group.

I don't feel as if there is a great risk or that there will be a massive difference one way or the other and the draw of doing something useful is strong, but I can't quite make up my mind. I'd love some other people's thoughts to consider.

Sorry to derail, but I don't want to post on the vaccine threads and get drawn into the Private Frasers telling me that if I have this or that I'll be do-o-omed.

@sirfred - you'd assume that hospital acquired infections would fall faster than rates in the general community given that the hospital staff are vaccinated and most inpatients are older, so also vaccinated. And that's also what I hear anecdotally from my friend who works in a hospital - they had a lot of outbreaks on non-Covid wards back in the autumn, but none lately.

@amicissimma

Does anyone have any insights into the advantages/disadvantages of having a different vaccine for the second one? I'm tempted to apply for the new trial as I'm in the right age and period-post-first-vaccine group.

I don't feel as if there is a great risk or that there will be a massive difference one way or the other and the draw of doing something useful is strong, but I can't quite make up my mind. I'd love some other people's thoughts to consider.

Sorry to derail, but I don't want to post on the vaccine threads and get drawn into the Private Frasers telling me that if I have this or that I'll be do-o-omed.

They'll check your antibodies and give you a booster if needed, so as a trial I think it's a no-brainer. I would expect a different vaccine type will give stronger protection for second dose, but of course it may depend on the specific vaccines and you open yourself up to either set of side effects. I like the look of both Moderna and Novovax, so that wouldn't worry me personally. I'd love to do it, but it's over 50 only.

@sirfredfredgeorge

I am right in believing a long term patient for reason X, who acquired covid in hospital, but remains in hospital for the reason X, is removed from the hospitalisations after the covid is gone? Or only after 28 days.

I also assume that covid acquisition in hospital is no longer high, the high rates only happen when there are high cases in hospital due to the difficulty to separate them?

I don't think they're removed at all. If you click on the numbers you get the overview about each one. Just for England it says the following, no mention of 28 days: "England

Data include all hospitals and are reported daily by trusts to NHS England and NHS Improvement. The data collected is classified as management information. It has been collected on a daily basis with a tight turn round time. No revisions have been made to the dataset, where known errors have come to light trusts have made the appropriate correction in the following day’s data. Any analysis of the data should be undertaken with this in mind.

On 11 December 2020 the coverage of data for patients in hospital was updated to align with NHS England publications and as a result the full time series for this item was revised. Previously the coverage had only been for Acute trusts with a type 1 A&E, this has now been extended so the time series now covers all Acute trusts, Mental Health Trusts and the Independent Sector. This brings this metric in line with other metrics – admissions to hospital and patients in mechanical ventilation beds which have always been on this basis.

Daily data at NHS Trust level is reported weekly on Thursdays, in line with NHS England reporting."

you'd assume that hospital acquired infections would fall faster than rates in the general community given

I think they'll be linked a bit to the "hospital community" - I have no idea what it's called but the people who are most likely to enter hospital, which will bias towards care home residents and similarly the more sick, so I can believe it lags a bit, and then falls faster the same as the over 90's case rates do.

Certainly I would imagine it's very low now.

amicissima - I’ve copied my reply from another thread:
I’m in the original version of the Com-Cov trial and have had 2 jabs - either 2 Pfizer, 2 AZ or one of each! It’s very well managed and I’ve been going for weekly blood tests to look at my antibody response. If they discover a particular combination doesn’t provoke a good response then they will recommend a booster. It all feels very safe.

@sirfredfredgeorge, @JanFebAnyMonth and others - 82% of positive LFTs shown to be correct: www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56750460.

I was curious about hospital acquired covid.

On the dashboard does the figure for patients admitted include those who were already in but later tested positive? Or do they just add those to the currently in hospital figure?

Not sure why I need to know this! Thanks for the thread.

They aren't counted as admitted, but are counted as Patients in hospital. If you click on any number on the dashboard it gives an explanation for what's included: coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare.
It's a very tricky one to calculate overall with much accuracy; say someone gets symptoms on day 3-13, there is an equal likelihood that they caught it before going into hospital or after admission.

There's more detail in the hospital files that you can use to separate admissions with covid from identification in hospital: www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/. Bigger ward outbreaks can be spotted, but I thought this one through at some stage and decided it wasn't possible to figure out more with any accuracy, so I gave up.

[quote MRex]**@sirfredfredgeorge, @JanFebAnyMonth and others - 82% of positive LFTs shown to be correct: www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56750460.[/quote]
So almost one in five are wrong?

Yep, so everyone should get a PCR to check

Yes thanks, heard that. If only they could do further, publicised, research on the false negatives!

Remind me, is it thought that the factors which produce false LFT results are the same as for PCR tests, ie if you have Covid and get a negative LFT, are you as ‘likely’ to get a negative PCR after taking into account the lower sensitivity, IYSWIM? (Sorry not sure if I’m explaining myself clearly there!)

I think patients who test positive in hospital are included in the admissions figure, as the definition for England includes this line “ Inpatients diagnosed with COVID-19 after admission are reported as being admitted on the day prior to their diagnosis”

So almost one in five are wrong?

In in 5 at the average prevalence for march-april, among the community who take tests and confirm them.

Remember this does not mean 1 in 5 are wrong at other prevalences, or in different communities.

The communities are unlikely to make much of a change compared to the groups testing in march, but the ratio is hugely sensitive to the prevalence.

It's a good low number though compared to what the porton down evaluation said for it, which would've expected a ratio nearer 50%.

@JanFebAnyMonth - I got very frustrated after lots of googling failed to reveal exactly what causes a false positive LFT. We don't know if it's old infection (but then should also be expected to trigger PCR), another coronavirus infection, a flaw in manufacture, flooding the stick... Loads about what the percentage might or might be, just nothing out there to explain why.

They haven't actually said 1 in 5 are wrong as not everyone might verify by PCR. (Maybe because a family member already has a positive PCR, or another reason.)

@SunsetGirl

They haven't actually said 1 in 5 are wrong as not everyone might verify by PCR. (Maybe because a family member already has a positive PCR, or another reason.)

That's a reasonable point, 82% of the ones checked were correct, so potentially those who know it's more likely to be positive didn't check it and the rate is higher. We must all now await the inevitable Jon Deeks rebuttal that LFTs miss most of the positive cases and are therefore still useless, did anyone see it yet?

It's also not necessarily that all of the 18% which are found negative via PCR are "wrong". It's 18% of those who for a PCR test to check showed up negative on the PCR test. There will be some people who were genuinely positive when they took their LFT but had shaken the virus off by the time they did a PCR test a day or two later. There are also going to be some false negatives from the PCR tests too. This study www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n287/rr estimates and 30% false negatives, which would suggest that this could well be the main reason for discrepancy between the test results.

Yes that’s part of what I was getting at firefliess.

Reading the BBC report I realise it’s not that they married PCR results with prior LFT results, which is what I assumed. They sent the LFTs off to be PCRd. Is that a fair test? I suppose, thinking further, it removes the problem you’re highlighting, of time difference meaning testing at a later point in the infection cycle though.

@JanFebAnyMonth

Yes that’s part of what I was getting at firefliess.

Reading the BBC report I realise it’s not that they married PCR results with prior LFT results, which is what I assumed. They sent the LFTs off to be PCRd. Is that a fair test? I suppose, thinking further, it removes the problem you’re highlighting, of time difference meaning testing at a later point in the infection cycle though.

I don't think it's the same swabs that were sent off for PCR testing - I think the language in the article is just a bit sloppy. The numbers they give aren't from some special research being done to test out how often the tests give the same result, but are clearly from the whole of the recent LFT testing regime - they are taking about 30,000 positive LFTs, half of which "were sent off" for PCR test (by which they must in fact mean that the people took themselves off for a new PCR test) and 18% of those came back negative

I booked a vacc appointment. Got there, got AZ offered. Almost everywhere in EU IBD patients are advised or can only get mRNA vacc due to 2 reasons:

• immune compromised ppl tend to have a lower efficacy as their immune system is already not working properly
• there have been reports (but not studies :( ) that virus vectors can cause flareups.

I presented these 2 facts to the nurse, who was interested as haven't heard it before. I told her the sources (eu ibd org, ema, canadians,,..)

She said fair enough, and told me Wembley are administering Moderna. Also called them up to defer me. But they are only giving it to under 30s. no exceptions.
She then advised me to go to the GP, get an official recommendation letter for Wembley that I should get the M. one.
GP - they will not give any such letter, regardless of any scientific facts or personal beliefs as they have been extra strongly advised to follow the gov guidance to the letter.

and the non plus ultra of the story:

• the vacc nurse -on a personal note- said that I can best get a letter citing psychological distress and mh issues, rather than to try with scientific facts.

The nurse was the most helpful person I have met in a very long time, she truly turned every stone to help me out. But the system is so inflexible that it hurts. and irrational. and narrow focused.

On the other hand I might get the P. or M. in another country, if I'm willing to risk a 2.5 hr flight on a plane where neg pcr is not mandatory for boarding. And I can't go by car (con't driving almost) because in that country appointments are same/next day usually. And even the it might be Sputnik or Sinovac.

Or I might wait for the GP here to get P. or M. in about 1-2 months time and see if I can get it then. Or not. who knows....

I don't think I'll ever be vaccinated.
My H. will be as of tomorrow (AZ). He, who doesn't go anywhere apart from taking the car for a 2 hr drive every month for battery health.
I am beyond frustrated. And before anyone starts saying how ungrateful I am and I should take the AZ - what's the point: risk 10 years of remission (and effing diets and restrictions) for a "maybe 50%" chance of the vaccine working. And I won't know what response it triggers because as a "normal" person (not in trial or anything) it's not monitored and the GP already said they won't do it.
And even if it was done - there is no checkpoint in the system to have boosters if the immune reaction is weak. tough luck.

Re: LFTs - my son had a very very faint hint of a line after 45 min last Mon, we redid test, read at 30min as per instructions and it was clear negative.

Moral of story he was picked up as positive on PCR on our ONS survey 5 days later. My thread is here
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4211633-Possible-whisper-of-a-line-on-LFT-are-they-like-pregnancy-tests

So I think they might be like a very early pregnancy test really!

@AvaCallanach

Re: LFTs - my son had a very very faint hint of a line after 45 min last Mon, we redid test, read at 30min as per instructions and it was clear negative.

Moral of story he was picked up as positive on PCR on our ONS survey 5 days later. My thread is here
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4211633-Possible-whisper-of-a-line-on-LFT-are-they-like-pregnancy-tests

So I think they might be like a very early pregnancy test really!

That's really interesting - having read your thread I shall be making sure we examine our LFTs very carefully in future!

I am sorry for your concerns, theSun and can understand why you may be worried. This may give you some reassurance.

www.thelancet.com/journals/langas/article/PIIS2468-1253(21)00024-8/fulltext

The difficulty is that the UK has to follow JCVI guidelines which don't exclude patients with inflammatory bowel conditions from any of the vaccines currently in use.
Following further research, if people who take immunosuppressant therapy are recommended to have a further booster jab - and it is currently if - it is likely that those individuals will be contacted by their GP or hospital specialist. So in the situation that it is needed you won't be forgotten.

If you want to pursue Moderna, It is also available a little bit further up the A1...

@TheSunIsStillShining West London Pharmacies are selling walk-in testing for post-vaccine antibodies - not sure how expensive/reliable they would be, but presumably similar to those being offered as part of trials or if your GP was to organise one. It might be worth looking into if it’s something you’re interested in.