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

These are the the first four five year age bands; the 0-4s up to 15-19s.

0-4s tracking almost identical to the position end of last September.

5-9s a lot higher now and tracking upwards as compared to a relatively stable period through last September

10-14s significantly higher with a far more rapid current trajectory as compared with September

15-19s different current trajectory but just about at the same equivalent rate. Position at end last September then jumped massively with freshers arriving at various Unis going from around 250 per 100,000 to close to 600 per 100,000 in the space of ten days.

Next 4 age bands

20-24s well above equivalent tracking point last September, but by the time we get to the 35-39s that age band is level and about to track well below the position as we headed into early October.

Next set of age bands from the 40 to 44s

Next set from the 60 to 64s; all already tracking below the position through September

Finally the three groups from the 80 to 84s

Thanks for those charts @boys. They really show how the overall cases are similar to September but that's because they're a composite of the much faster spread of the current strain among the unvaccinated, and much lower spread among the older vaccinated age groups.

They really show how the overall cases are similar to September but that's because they're a composite of the much faster spread

Or because of increased detection in the age groups.

Why if it's much faster spread is the un-vaccinated 0-4 not tracking differently? (this is a question, I don't necessarily believe it isn't spreading faster)

(oh and yes, thanks for the graphs boys3!)

Really interesting graphs, thank you boys. Clear that double vaccinated groups aren't going up as quickly.

Or because of increased detection in the age groups

I'm not sure I agree here, the 10 to 14s and 15s to 19s may be doing more testing, but not the 5 to 9s. In the 0 to 4 group, I suspect they only get tested if they are the only ones in a household with symptoms.

but not the 5 to 9s

Many anecdotal reports of all isolating children in class closures being asked to test, as well as all close contacts of other cases, but we don't have the data to know.

If it's spreading more though, why would it not be spreading more in 0-4's? They're likely to either have young enough parents for them to be unvaccinated or older siblings?

@sirfredfredgeorge - the original variant didn't affect many kids below late teen, Alpha variant then had a big impact in secondary age 12-15, Delta variant is now affecting 5-9 as well as the older kids. The surveillance report stats have been fairly consistent in this across every area where infection rates rise by year group. It's unpalatable to some to agree that younger kids were affected less in earlier waves, but that's what the data suggests. Worth remembering that under 5s have been in nursery at least since summer last year, so the majority would be sent for testing with any fever or cough as much as older people. The next variant might have better tricks for infecting the little ones.

Fantastic graph he boys3

To rival the FT or NYT!!!

They really show the impact of the vaccines.

@sirfredfredgeorge

They really show how the overall cases are similar to September but that's because they're a composite of the much faster spread

Or because of increased detection in the age groups.

Why if it's much faster spread is the un-vaccinated 0-4 not tracking differently? (this is a question, I don't necessarily believe it isn't spreading faster)

No that's not the case. The increased use of LFTs would have caused a one-off increase when they started being used. The charts show clear exponential growth in actual cases among children and also early 20s (who aren't really being tested a lot more than previously) There hasn't been a continuous and exponential growth in testing over the last 2 months.

Re the 0-4s, could they be being continually under tested maybe? People are (increasingly?) reluctant to submit very young children to testing. Nurseries also tend to have smaller groups of children and more flexibility to be outside in fine weather, so maybe easier to contain?

The increased use of LFTs would have caused a one-off increase when they started being used

I wasn't suggesting increased use of LFT's though, I was suggesting increased PCR testing of contacts for the increased detection. Previously a contact was told "isolate", now they're told "isolate and test so we get more info on the variant etc."

If people are more reluctant to test, we'd be seeing a decrease in testing numbers - but we aren't are we? I'm sure people might be reluctant to test, but I think it would apply to all ages (although given no-one in my family has ever had a reason to test, I'm always surprised how many people have)

@sirfredfredgeorge

The increased use of LFTs would have caused a one-off increase when they started being used

I wasn't suggesting increased use of LFT's though, I was suggesting increased PCR testing of contacts for the increased detection. Previously a contact was told "isolate", now they're told "isolate and test so we get more info on the variant etc."

If people are more reluctant to test, we'd be seeing a decrease in testing numbers - but we aren't are we? I'm sure people might be reluctant to test, but I think it would apply to all ages (although given no-one in my family has ever had a reason to test, I'm always surprised how many people have)

I've heard of that happened in a few select areas but there's been no change to the rules in PCR testing for most of the country. The total rate of PCR testing hasn't gone up much so don't think it's been a big contribution to detected cases. I've also heard anecdotally for months of people going for tests when they're informed they're a contact, even though you're not really supposed to unless you have symptoms, so suspect that encouraging what a lot of people were already doing may not have made a huge impact.

I thought the advice had actually changed, off to check.

@sirfredfredgeorge

The increased use of LFTs would have caused a one-off increase when they started being used

I wasn't suggesting increased use of LFT's though, I was suggesting increased PCR testing of contacts for the increased detection. Previously a contact was told "isolate", now they're told "isolate and test so we get more info on the variant etc."

If people are more reluctant to test, we'd be seeing a decrease in testing numbers - but we aren't are we? I'm sure people might be reluctant to test, but I think it would apply to all ages (although given no-one in my family has ever had a reason to test, I'm always surprised how many people have)

We did our second only PCR this week as school asks you to do it if isolating

Doesn’t release you from isolation though if negative

Yup, close contacts now advised to PCR test. Goodness knows when it changed but I think I started to hear or read of examples a few weeks ago?

www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/testing/get-tested-for-coronavirus/

We have certainly been asking but I thought this was an LA thing.

Right that is a change to testing then if all close contacts are being encouraged to get a test. I hadn't realised that was now the standard rules. Still wouldn't really explain continued exponential growth and only in certain age groups though, but could explain a bit of the overall increase I guess.

It's a good thing that they've made that change though. You can take the right precautions to reduce the risks of spreading it within your household if you know who's got it, and reduces the chance of someone coming down with it, say, 7 days on from a close contact and being back at work 3 days later unaware.

I guess the big danger with it is that people who test negative may not continue to isolate, even when instructed to.

@JanFebAnyMonth

I guess the big danger with it is that people who test negative may not continue to isolate, even when instructed to.

Yes that's clearly a potential downside. Especially with the turnaround time on a PCR test.

Well that was certainly the case with the legendary sleepover at my school.

It might

Bit then again a positive will keep others home which wouldn’t otherwise happen

Yes interesting that the rules have changed. I'm not sure it has been advertised clearly. Our school has a year group closed and the information to parents provided by the LA didn't say this. I wonder how many people know.