Covid-19 Per Capita Fatality Rate: A Path Analysis Model

  1. Michael Penuliar
  2. Candice Clark
  3. Debra Curti
  4. Miguel Carrasco
  5. Catherine Hudson
  6. Billy Philips

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives

Various individual factors have been shown to influence Covid-19 mortalities, but these factors do not exist in isolation. Unique to this study is a multivariate approach that has yet to be fully explored by previous research. Using an interconnected multifactor model, this work investigated social determinant, geographic, prior health, and political behavioral factors likely to influence Covid-19 per capita fatalities in Texas.

Methods

County-level income, rurality, insurance, health status, 2020 presidential vote percentage, and fatality rate data were collected and analyzed in a path analysis model with Covid-19 per capita fatalities as the key variable of interest.

Results

The analysis found strong support for the proposed model structure ( R 2 = 37.6%). The strongest overall effects on the Covid-19 per capita fatality rate came from income levels and voting behaviors.

Conclusion

The model explained a substantial amount of variability in mortalities attributed to Covid-19. Socioeconomic and political factors provided the strongest contribution to the per-capita Covid-19 death rate, controlling for the other variables studied. The Covid-19 pandemic was highly politicized by various leaders and media outlets. The current analysis showed that political trends were one of the key overall factors related to Covid-19 mortality. The strongest overall factor was median income. Income is used to enhance one’s current health or acquire adequate treatment which may safeguard people from the most severe effects of Covid-19. Counties with lower income levels had higher rates of Covid-19 per capita fatalities.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.22.21263976: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: The data collected for this study was readily available online for public use and thus an Institutional Review Board evaluation was not needed.
    Consent: As this study collated and analyzed public data, there were no human subjects and thus no informed consent was necessary.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data was analyzed using the path analysis software, SPSS Amos (v 26).
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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 10.1101/2021.09.22.21263976v1 on medRxiv