Are COVID-19 Mortality Statistics Valid?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnold Cusmariu
Keyword(s):  



2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Ishitani ◽  
R Teixeira ◽  
D Abreu ◽  
L Paixão ◽  
E França

Abstract Background Quality of cause-of-death information is fundamental for health planning. Traditionally, this quality has been assessed by the analysis of ill-defined causes from chapter XVIII of the International Classification of Diseases - 10th revision (ICD-10). However, studies have considered other useless diagnoses for public health purposes, defined, in conjunction with ill-defined causes, as garbage codes (GC). In Brazil, despite the high completeness of the Mortality Information System, approximately 30% of deaths are attributable to GCs. This study aims to analyze the frequency of GCs in Belo Horizonte municipality, the capital of Minas Gerais state, Brazil. Methods Data of deaths from 2011 to 2013 in Belo Horizonte were analyzed. GCs were classified according to the GBD 2015 study list. These codes were classified in: a) GCs from chapter XVIII of ICD-10 (GC-R), and b) GC from other chapters of ICD-10 (GC-nonR). Proportions of GC were calculated by sex, age, and place of occurrence. Results In Belo Horizonte, from the total of 44,123 deaths, 5.5% were classified as GC-R. The majority of GCs were GC-nonR (25% of total deaths). We observed a higher proportion of GC in children (1 to 4 years) and in people aged over 60 years. GC proportion was also higher in females, except in the age-groups under 1 year and 30-59 years. Home deaths (n = 7,760) had higher proportions of GCs compared with hospital deaths (n = 30,182), 36.9% and 28.7%, respectively. The leading GCs were the GC-R other ill-defined and unspecified causes of death (ICD-10 code R99)), and the GCs-nonR unspecified pneumonia (J18.9), unspecified stroke (I64), and unspecified septicemia (A41.9). Conclusions Analysis of GCs is essential to evaluate the quality of mortality information. Key messages Analysis of ill-defined causes (GC-R) is not sufficient to evaluate the quality of information on causes of death. Causes of death analysis should consider the total GC, in order to advance the discussion and promote adequate intervention on the quality of mortality statistics.





The Lancet ◽  
1882 ◽  
Vol 119 (3045) ◽  
pp. 37-38
Author(s):  
R.P.B. Taaffe
Keyword(s):  


2003 ◽  
Vol 172 (3) ◽  
pp. 154-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Waters ◽  
SM Gormally


PLoS ONE ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. e1711 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Lopman ◽  
Simon Gregson


1995 ◽  
Vol 166 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Hawton ◽  
Sue Simkin ◽  
Joan Fagg ◽  
Michael Hawkins

BackgroundThe aim was to determine the extent, characteristics and timing of suicide in Oxford University students.MethodStudents who died from suicide or undetermined cause between October 1976 and September 1990 were identified through University records and individual colleges. Information about each student was sought from coroners, college staff, general practitioners and hospital case notes.ResultsThere were 21 suicides (16 men and 5 women) and one open verdict (female). The observed number of suicides (0) was greater than the number expected (E = 11.09) on the basis of mortality statistics for England and Wales (O/E = 1.89; 95% CI 1.17 to 2.90). When deaths due to undetermined cause were included, however, the difference between O and E (17.03) was much reduced (O/E = 1.29; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.95). There was no evidence of an association with the Finals examination but two-thirds of the students had been worried about academic achievement or their courses. Nearly half appeared to have had a psychiatric disorder (mostly depression).ConclusionsThe much publicised apparent excess of Oxford University student suicides may be partly artefactual. Measures for preventing student suicides include careful induction upon arrival at university, means of alleviating academic stress and worries, and readily available and closely associated student counselling and psychiatric services.



2004 ◽  
Vol 46 (S1) ◽  
pp. 127-127
Author(s):  
Stefanie Klug ◽  
Doris Bardehle ◽  
Maria Blettner


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document