Covid-19, non-Covid-19 and excess mortality rates not comparable across countries

  1. Gabrielle Kelly
  2. Stefano Petti
  3. Norman Noah

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Evidence that more people in some countries and fewer in others are dying because of the pandemic, than is reflected by reported Covid-19 mortality rates, is derived from mortality data. Using publicly available databases, deaths attributed to Covid-19 in 2020 and all deaths for the years 2015-2020 were tabulated for 35 countries together with economic, health, demographic, and government response stringency index variables. Residual mortality rates (RMR) in 2020 were calculated as excess mortality minus reported mortality rates due to Covid-19 where excess deaths were observed deaths in 2020 minus the average for 2015-2019. Differences in RMR are differences not attributed to reported Covid-19. For about half the countries, RMR’s were negative and for half, positive. The absolute rates in some countries were double those in others. In a regression analysis, population density and proportion of female smokers were positively associated with both Covid-19 and excess mortality while the human development index and proportion of male smokers were negatively associated with both. RMR was not associated with any of the investigated variables. The results show that published data on mortality from Covid-19 cannot be directly comparable across countries. This may be due to differences in Covid-19 death reporting and in addition, the unprecedented public health measures implemented to control the pandemic may have produced either increased or reduced excess deaths due to other diseases. Further data on cause-specific mortality is required to determine the extent to which residual mortality represents non-Covid-19 deaths and to explain differences between countries.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1101/2021.03.31.21254689v2 on medRxiv
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.31.21254689: (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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.03.31.21254689v1 on medRxiv
  4. Version published to 10.1017/s0950268821001850