Data, Stats Thread June 11

[PatriciaHolm]

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/
Covid 19 Variant Mapping Sanger Institute covid19.sanger.ac.uk/lineages/raw
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

@Firefliess

I think the interesting thing about the third wave is that the number of cases required to get hospital admissions up to high levels is going to be very much higher than we've ever seen before - because they'll be mainly in the young, and because vaccines help reduce the severity of Covid. But I've seen very little discussion about how these high case rates will affect things - everyone seems entirely focused on hospital admissions, but case rates in schools that are 10 fold higher than present are going to lead to massive disruption for children and parents. Also in workplaces they'll be huge numbers off because they've been in contact with a Covid case, as even vaccinated people have to isolate for 10 days every time. And more social mixing will mean everyone has more contacts. By focusing only on hospital admissions and deaths I think we're failing to think about the impact these high case rates are going to have - staff shortages (including in the NHS), holidays cancelled, schools closed. There has been no talk about these and no changes planned for the 10 day isolations for all contacts. I'd like to at least see the projected case rates by age group that the modellers are expecting, and some analysis of what that'll mean for the education sector in particular.

The entire junior section of my nephew's school is closed at present and it is likely the infants will need to soon because of sibling connections between the two departments. It is incredibly disruptive and I can see the significant psychological effect that school closure is having on both my nephews.

Thank you @Firefliess
I seem to be all over the place today, terribly sorry.

@TheSunIsStillShining From The Telegraph:

Emma Duncan, professor of clinical endocrinology at KCL and honorary consultant physician at Guy's and St Thomas' in London, and Dr Michael Absoud, senior clinical lecturer in the department of woman and children's health at King's College London (KCL), led a study of more than 2,500 children using data from the ZOE symptom tracker app.

They assessed a child's condition at four and eight weeks after symptoms first emerged and compared it to children who had similar symptoms that were not caused by Covid.

"It does happen where children with Covid have symptoms for more than four weeks, but it is a much smaller proportion than adults," Prof Duncan told The Telegraph. "In kids, we are talking fewer than one in 20 and for symptoms of more than eight weeks it's less than two per cent."

The researchers found children recovered from Covid in less than a week on average, and that there was a greater "burden of disease" for children sick with something other than the virus.

"Most parents can be assured that if they [children] have symptomatic Covid-19, they will get better and things will settle down in a short period of time," Prof Duncan said. "At the moment, the biggest public health issue worldwide is Covid-19 but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater – kids do get sick with other things and we should look after them as well."

A smaller study from Murdoch Children's Research Institute in Melbourne (MCRI), published in the BMJ, backs up the findings. Data from a group of 171 children found only one in 12 children who had Covid and developed symptoms still had health issues two weeks later.

"The most common post-acute Covid-19 symptoms were mild post-viral cough (four per cent) and fatigue (two per cent)," the authors wrote. All symptoms had cleared up by two months post-infection, they said.

Dr Shidan Tosif, a general paediatrician at the MCRI and co-author of the study, told The Telegraph that comparing studies is often difficult, but the KCL results "are consistent with our study".

He said: "Our data suggests lingering symptoms following mild/asymptomatic disease, especially in young children, is uncommon."

yes, you see, if allowed to be transmitted unchecked through school population, that is up to 250k children with symptoms lasting over 8 weeks.

Whether you regard this as a big risk or a small risk depends on various factors, your degree of compassion, your educational level etc.

Fine and dandy, that is an argument to vaccinate the ones that have health issues then

I think Whitty did actually say this last night in answer to a question on vaccinating all children. His response was, I think, that it was still being looked into ie: the risk/benefit analysis, but it would make sense to vaccinate vulnerable children, as their risk of bad disease and dying was higher.

@BigWoollyJumpers

Fine and dandy, that is an argument to vaccinate the ones that have health issues then

I think Whitty did actually say this last night in answer to a question on vaccinating all children. His response was, I think, that it was still being looked into ie: the risk/benefit analysis, but it would make sense to vaccinate vulnerable children, as their risk of bad disease and dying was higher.

well said that CMO

Further to the above, it appears that 15 paediatric hubs are being opened nationwide with a particular remit to address long covid in children.

So this is perhaps a little nuanced.

I think the scientists on the one hand would like to reassure parents of the many children who are catching covid in school, that only a minority of children have long term problems.

On the other hand, I don't think major investment in this area would be happening unless there was a real issue presenting itself in significant numbers to the medical profession.

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/long-covid-clinic-children-open-20815867

[quote herecomesthsun]Further to the above, it appears that 15 paediatric hubs are being opened nationwide with a particular remit to address long covid in children.

So this is perhaps a little nuanced.

I think the scientists on the one hand would like to reassure parents of the many children who are catching covid in school, that only a minority of children have long term problems.

On the other hand, I don't think major investment in this area would be happening unless there was a real issue presenting itself in significant numbers to the medical profession.

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/long-covid-clinic-children-open-20815867[/quote]
When DD had CMV (like Glandular Fever) and suffered three months plus of post viral symptoms, we had to get her fully tested privately. To be fair the GP's did do a simple set of test, but were not able to run others, and certainly were not able to support post recovery.

Perhaps this is something that has been needed for some, and due to Covid, and the numbers involved, has at last been prioritised.

I can think of a small number of children every year, in the upper years of school, who have over the years had weeks off to post viral symptoms. It's always been there, just not very well understood or acknowledged.

herecomesthsun:
"yes, you see, if allowed to be transmitted unchecked through school population, that is up to 250k children with symptoms lasting over 8 weeks."

This is a good example of how inaccuracies become untrue 'facts' broadcast around the internet.

The article says, "only one in 12 children who had Covid and developed symptoms still had health issues two weeks later. (my bold)

"The most common post-acute Covid-19 symptoms were mild post-viral cough (four per cent) and fatigue (two per cent)," the authors wrote. All symptoms had cleared up by two months post-infection"

All symptoms had cleared up by two months post-infection does NOT mean "symptoms lasting over 8 weeks."

But sooner or later, we'll get someone posting 'I read that children can have symptoms lasting over 8 weeks'.

@MarcelineMissouri
Thank you.

Yes I think reading for comprehension is important

"“It does happen where children with Covid have symptoms for more than four weeks, but it is a much smaller proportion than adults.

In kids, we are talking fewer than one in 20 and for symptoms of more than eight weeks it’s less than two per cent”"

Prof Emma Duncan does literally say that a number of children have symptoms lasting longer than 8 weeks.

She does mention the ballpark figure of >2%.

The much smaller study (now that I have searched quite hard for what you were talking about) didn't have patients with symptoms for over 8 weeks. The bigger and therefore probably more impressive study did find children with symptoms for more than 8 weeks.

So you have to read the whole article before you start erm carrying on like that.

It's how inaccuracies get spread around t'internet innit?

sorry that should be

2-4% of chicken pox infections have complications that last more than the "normal" time, and we actually have the choice to vaccinate against that but don't.

More importantly though, what alternative strategy are you suggesting? Untested vaccine? lockdown until there's a tested vaccine? something else?

@sirfredfredgeorge

2-4% of chicken pox infections have complications that last more than the "normal" time, and we actually have the choice to vaccinate against that but don't.

More importantly though, what alternative strategy are you suggesting? Untested vaccine? lockdown until there's a tested vaccine? something else?

Well, we can choose to vaccinate against chicken pox (I did and would be happy to support a national programme, US does, Australia does etc etc.)

Have I not already said that I think the vaccine (which is approved already by one of our regulatory bodies & has been tested & and is being used in Israel and the US) should be offered to vulnerable children?

This is a different report than the Great Ormond Street Hospital findings published in the Lancet: www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00138-3/fulltext#.
Tiny study of 48, where the headline was children are much recovered from inflammation, but inflammation was only one symptom mentioned. 6(13%) still had gastrointestinal problems at 6 months, 1 still had inflammation, 2 had echocardiogram issues, 18 had some neurological issues but very mild by then, 18 below 3rd centile on 6 min walk test.
So, anyone hopeful that the 2% looks overblown is likely to be underestimating.

@herecomesthsun

yes, you see, if allowed to be transmitted unchecked through school population, that is up to 250k children with symptoms lasting over 8 weeks.

Whether you regard this as a big risk or a small risk depends on various factors, your degree of compassion, your educational level etc.

Wow, do you mean to be so rude? So we’re talking a small number of kids having a lingering cough or fatigue, and yes an even smaller number suffering from more severe symptoms. I assume your figure of 250,000 is based on every school aged child catching covid? Which even if it was running unchecked (which it isn’t) isn’t going to happen because not everybody catches it.

As a mother of 2 school aged children who also works in a school and is devoid of neither intelligence or compassion I do indeed consider these figures to show that the risk to children of long covid is small

Vulnerable children are irrelevant to my question, your concern was with "long covid", these are not in vulnerable children by your own quoted statistics, my question was how to prevent it?

On vulnerable kids, Could you point to the US authorization, I've not seen anything under 12 anywhere (other than the start of the trials obviously, but they cannot report until September at the earliest)

@MRex I’m not sure they’re looking at the same thing though really are they? The one you are taking about is studying children who have already suffered a serious response to covid rather than ‘ordinary’ cases?

" for symptoms of more than eight weeks it's less than two per cent." Which is what Prof Duncan actually says.

Is not nearly as dramatic as "up to 250k children with symptoms lasting over 8 weeks." or ">2%."

But I think we have a different approach to the message we would like to spread so I won't engage further.

Here we go. Molteni et al www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.05.21256649v1

(preprint) Illness duration and symptom profile in a large cohort of symptomatic UK school-aged children tested for SARS-CoV-2

258,790 kids aged 5-17

1,734 children (588 younger children, 1,146 older children) had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result and calculable duration of illness within the study time frame.

25 (1.8%) of 1,379 children experienced symptoms for ≥56 days.

So

• as far as I can see this is a prospective study. i.e We are starting with a large group of children & looking at the outcomes going forward. The vast majority of the 258k + children (as I understand it) didn't actually go on to get covid. So it is overall a bit less informative than one might have hoped.

• they did however find 25/ 1379 children with persistent symptoms.

So symptoms are documented to persist beyond 8 weeks for a few.

The next questions are, which children are more vulnerable? can we identify who is most at risk? how problematic is the illness for those few? how can we best treat and manage acute illness and residual chronic symptoms.

@MarcellineMissouri

I don't think asking for a compassionate approach to vulnerable children is being rude.

But you are right, we probably have different values.

Vaccines aren't approved not even in usa for below 12s, they're still doing some tests and they might be ready for next year.

[quote herecomesthsun]@MarcellineMissouri

I don't think asking for a compassionate approach to vulnerable children is being rude.

But you are right, we probably have different values.[/quote]
what's your proposal for protecting these vulnerable kids that cant have their vaccine for a while as there is none for them?

@herecomesthsun I am responding to your message at 14:42 which does not mention vulnerable children at all and basically says that if people don’t view long covid as a big risk to children then they lack compassion and intelligence 🤷🏼‍♀️ So yes I consider that rude.

@amicissimma

" for symptoms of more than eight weeks it's less than two per cent." Which is what Prof Duncan actually says.

Is not nearly as dramatic as "up to 250k children with symptoms lasting over 8 weeks." or ">2%."

But I think we have a different approach to the message we would like to spread so I won't engage further.

okay, lets go back to my earlier posts.

I didn't have the exact age parameters of the original article, so I went for the number of children 0-15 in the UK(12.7 million). Actually Prof Duncan's study was looking at 5-17 year olds. So lets call it x million.

In that age group they found approaching 2% to have symptoms for longer than 8 weeks. (Actually 1/8%).

So, on the one hand, parents whose children currently have covid could be reassured that, in the absence of other risk factors, those children are very unlikely to go on to get long covid. So this could be - reassuring.

On the other hand, 1.8% of x million kids aged 5-17 will be a very big number. Let's call it y (if covid were to pass through all UK schoolchildren, y would be well into 6 figures) . Some of these already have long covid, because they got covid and were unlucky.

It is because we a) already have many children affected by long covid and b) we have the prospect of very many more (potentially the very many thousands) that we have this new funding for long covid centres.

And this is very data driven.