They’re Dying in the Suburbs: COVID-19 Cases and Deaths by Geography in Louisiana (USA)

  1. Alina Schnake-Mahl
  2. Usama Bilal

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The national COVID-19 conversation in the US has mostly focused on urban areas, without sufficient examination of another geography with large vulnerable populations: the suburbs. While suburbs are often thought of as areas of uniform affluence and racial homogeneity, over the past 20 years, poverty and diversity have increased substantially in the suburbs. In this study, we compare geographic and temporal trends in COVID-19 cases and deaths in Louisiana, one of the few states with high rates of COVID-19 during both the spring and summer. We find that incidence and mortality rates were initially highest in New Orleans. By the second peak, trends reversed: suburban areas experienced higher rates than New Orleans and similar rates to other urban and rural areas. We also find that increased social vulnerability was associated with increased positivity and incidence during the first peak. During the second peak, these associations reversed in New Orleans while persisting in other urban, suburban, and rural areas. The work draws attention to the high rates of COVID-19 cases and deaths in suburban areas and the importance of metropolitan-wide actions to address COVID-19.

Registration

N/A

Funding source

NIH (DP5OD26429) and RWJF (77644)

Code and data availability

Code for replication along with data is available here: https://github.com/alinasmahl1/COVID_Louisiana_Suburban/ .

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.10.28.20221341: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.10.28.20221341 on medRxiv