Quantifying political influence on COVID-19 fatality in Brazil

  1. Leandro de Almeida
  2. Pedro V. Carelli
  3. Nara Gualberto Cavalcanti
  4. José-Dias do Nascimento
  5. Daniel Felinto

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic was severely aggravated in Brazil due to its politicization by the country’s federal government. However, the impact of diffuse political forces on the fatality of an epidemic is notoriously difficult to quantify. Here we introduce a method to measure this effect in the Brazilian case, based on the inhomogeneous distribution throughout the national territory of political support for the federal government. This political support is quantified by the voting rates in the last general election in Brazil. This data is correlated with the fatality rates by COVID-19 in each Brazilian state as the number of deaths grows over time. We show that the correlation between fatality rate and political support grows as the government’s misinformation campaign is developed. This led to the dominance of such political factor for the pandemic impact in Brazil in 2021. Once this dominance is established, this correlation allows for an estimation of the total number of deaths due to political influence as 350±70 thousand up to the end of 2021, corresponding to (57±11)% of the total number of deaths.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0264293
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.02.09.22270714: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    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.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2022.02.09.22270714 on medRxiv