According to a study conducted in March 2020, the most used sources of news and information regarding the coronavirus among news consumers worldwide were major news organizations, with 64 percent of respondents sayng that they got most of their information about the virus from larger news companies. The study also showed that social media was a popular news source for COVID-19 updates in several countries around the world. Despite social networking sites being the least trusted media source worldwide, for many consumers social media was a more popular source of information for updates on the coronavirus pandemic than global health organizations like the WHO or National health authorities like the CDC, particularly in Japan, South Africa, and Brazil.

Government sources also varied in popularity among consumers in different parts of the world. Whilst 63 percent of Italian respondents relied mostly on national government sources, just 22 percent of UK news consumers did the same, preferring to get their updates from larger organizations. Similarly, twice as many Italians used local government sources to keep up to date than adults in the United Kingdom, and U.S. consumers were also less likely to rely on news from the government.

A global study conducted in March 2020 gathered data on consumers' attitudes to, experiences of, and issues with news consumption regarding the coronavirus pandemic, and found that 74 percent of respondents were concerned about the amount of fake news being spread about the virus, which would impede their efforts to find out the facts that they need to stay updated. Others were met with challenges when seeking out trustworthy and reliable information, and 85 percent felt that the public should be given more coronavirus news and updates from scientists and less from politicians.

Updates

• Notice of data discontinuation: Since the start of the pandemic, AP has reported case and death counts from data provided by Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University has announced that they will stop their daily data collection efforts after March 10. As Johns Hopkins stops providing data, the AP will also stop collecting daily numbers for COVID cases and deaths. The HHS and CDC now collect and visualize key metrics for the pandemic. AP advises using those resources when reporting on the pandemic going forward.

  • CDC Weekly case and death counts (national and state level)
  • CDC County level cases and deaths
  • HHS New hospital admissions
  • CDC NowCast COVID variant proportions (national and regional level)

• April 9, 2020

  • The population estimate data for New York County, NY has been updated to include all five New York City counties (Kings County, Queens County, Bronx County, Richmond County and New York County). This has been done to match the Johns Hopkins COVID-19 data, which aggregates counts for the five New York City counties to New York County.

• April 20, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins death totals in the US now include confirmed and probable deaths in accordance with CDC guidelines as of April 14. One significant result of this change was an increase of more than 3,700 deaths in the New York City count. This change will likely result in increases for death counts elsewhere as well. The AP does not alter the Johns Hopkins source data, so probable deaths are included in this dataset as well.

• April 29, 2020

  • The AP is now providing timeseries data for counts of COVID-19 cases and deaths. The raw counts are provided here unaltered, along with a population column with Census ACS-5 estimates and calculated daily case and death rates per 100,000 people. Please read the updated caveats section for more information.

• September 1st, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins is now providing counts for the five New York City counties individually.

• February 12, 2021

  • The Ohio Department of Health recently announced that as many as 4,000 COVID-19 deaths may have been underreported through the state’s reporting system, and that the "daily reported death counts will be high for a two to three-day period."
  • Because deaths data will be anomalous for consecutive days, we have chosen to freeze Ohio's rolling average for daily deaths at the last valid measure until Johns Hopkins is able to back-distribute the data. The raw daily death counts, as reported by Johns Hopkins and including the backlogged death data, will still be present in the new_deaths column.

• February 16, 2021

  - Johns Hopkins has reconciled Ohio's historical deaths data with the state.

  Overview

The AP is using data collected by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering as our source for outbreak caseloads and death counts for the United States and globally.

The Hopkins data is available at the county level in the United States. The AP has paired this data with population figures and county rural/urban designations, and has calculated caseload and death rates per 100,000 people. Be aware that caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.

This data is from the Hopkins dashboard that is updated regularly throughout the day. Like all organizations dealing with data, Hopkins is constantly refining and cleaning up their feed, so there may be brief moments where data does not appear correctly. At this link, you’ll find the Hopkins daily data reports, and a clean version of their feed.

The AP is updating this dataset hourly at 45 minutes past the hour.

To learn more about AP's data journalism capabilities for publishers, corporations and financial institutions, go here or email kromano@ap.org.

Queries

Use AP's queries to filter the data or to join to other datasets we've made available to help cover the coronavirus pandemic

• Filter cases by state here

• Rank states by their status as current hotspots. Calculates the 7-day rolling average of new cases per capita in each state: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=481e82a4-1b2f-41c2-9ea1-d91aa4b3b1ac

• Find recent hotspots within your state by running a query to calculate the 7-day rolling average of new cases by capita in each county: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=b566f1db-3231-40fe-8099-311909b7b687&showTemplatePreview=true

• Join county-level case data to an earlier dataset released by AP on local hospital capacity here. To find out more about the hospital capacity dataset, see the full details.

• Pull the 100 counties with the highest per-capita confirmed cases here

• Rank all the counties by the highest per-capita rate of new cases in the past 7 days here. Be aware that because this ranks per-capita caseloads, very small counties may rise to the very top, so take into account raw caseload figures as well.

Interactive

The AP has designed an interactive map to track COVID-19 cases reported by Johns Hopkins.

@(https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/15/)

Interactive Embed Code

<iframe title="USA counties (2018) choropleth map Mapping COVID-19 cases by county" aria-describedby="" id="datawrapper-chart-nRyaf" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/10/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" height="400"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">(function() {'use strict';window.addEventListener('message', function(event) {if (typeof event.data['datawrapper-height'] !== 'undefined') {for (var chartId in event.data['datawrapper-height']) {var iframe = document.getElementById('datawrapper-chart-' + chartId) || document.querySelector("iframe[src*='" + chartId + "']");if (!iframe) {continue;}iframe.style.height = event.data['datawrapper-height'][chartId] + 'px';}}});})();</script>

Caveats

• This data represents the number of cases and deaths reported by each state and has been collected by Johns Hopkins from a number of sources cited on their website.
• In some cases, deaths or cases of people who've crossed state lines -- either to receive treatment or because they became sick and couldn't return home while traveling -- are reported in a state they aren't currently in, because of state reporting rules.
• In some states, there are a number of cases not assigned to a specific county -- for those cases, the county name is "unassigned to a single county"
• This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University's COVID-19 tracking project. The AP is simply making it available here for ease of use for reporters and members.
• Caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.
• Population estimates at the county level are drawn from 2014-18 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey.
• The Urban/Rural classification scheme is from the Center for Disease Control and Preventions's National Center for Health Statistics. It puts each county into one of six categories -- from Large Central Metro to Non-Core -- according to population and other characteristics. More details about the classifications can be found here.

Johns Hopkins timeseries data - Johns Hopkins pulls data regularly to update their dashboard. Once a day, around 8pm EDT, Johns Hopkins adds the counts for all areas they cover to the timeseries file. These counts are snapshots of the latest cumulative counts provided by the source on that day. This can lead to inconsistencies if a source updates their historical data for accuracy, either increasing or decreasing the latest cumulative count. - Johns Hopkins periodically edits their historical timeseries data for accuracy. They provide a file documenting all errors in their timeseries files that they have identified and fixed here

Attribution

This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 tracking project

As the United States battles the coronavirus, news consumers across the country have been attempting to keep themselves updated with how the pandemic is progressing, and a survey held in March 2020 revealed that the most trusted news source for details on COVID-19 was the CDC, with 85 percent of respondents saying that they trusted the centers to provide accurate information on the topic. Following closely behind was the World Health Organization and then the state government, but just 25 percent of consumers said that they trusted social media sites to publish reliable and accurate news about the coronavirus outbreak.

Overview

The Marshall Project, the nonprofit investigative newsroom dedicated to the U.S. criminal justice system, has partnered with The Associated Press to compile data on the prevalence of COVID-19 infection in prisons across the country. The Associated Press is sharing this data as the most comprehensive current national source of COVID-19 outbreaks in state and federal prisons.

Lawyers, criminal justice reform advocates and families of the incarcerated have worried about what was happening in prisons across the nation as coronavirus began to take hold in the communities outside. Data collected by The Marshall Project and AP shows that hundreds of thousands of prisoners, workers, correctional officers and staff have caught the illness as prisons became the center of some of the country’s largest outbreaks. And thousands of people — most of them incarcerated — have died.

In December, as COVID-19 cases spiked across the U.S., the news organizations also shared cumulative rates of infection among prison populations, to better gauge the total effects of the pandemic on prison populations. The analysis found that by mid-December, one in five state and federal prisoners in the United States had tested positive for the coronavirus -- a rate more than four times higher than the general population.

This data, which is updated weekly, is an effort to track how those people have been affected and where the crisis has hit the hardest.

Methodology and Caveats

The data tracks the number of COVID-19 tests administered to people incarcerated in all state and federal prisons, as well as the staff in those facilities. It is collected on a weekly basis by Marshall Project and AP reporters who contact each prison agency directly and verify published figures with officials.

Each week, the reporters ask every prison agency for the total number of coronavirus tests administered to its staff members and prisoners, the cumulative number who tested positive among staff and prisoners, and the numbers of deaths for each group.

The time series data is aggregated to the system level; there is one record for each prison agency on each date of collection. Not all departments could provide data for the exact date requested, and the data indicates the date for the figures.

To estimate the rate of infection among prisoners, we collected population data for each prison system before the pandemic, roughly in mid-March, in April, June, July, August, September and October. Beginning the week of July 28, we updated all prisoner population numbers, reflecting the number of incarcerated adults in state or federal prisons. Prior to that, population figures may have included additional populations, such as prisoners housed in other facilities, which were not captured in our COVID-19 data. In states with unified prison and jail systems, we include both detainees awaiting trial and sentenced prisoners.

To estimate the rate of infection among prison employees, we collected staffing numbers for each system. Where current data was not publicly available, we acquired other numbers through our reporting, including calling agencies or from state budget documents. In six states, we were unable to find recent staffing figures: Alaska, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Montana, Utah.

To calculate the cumulative COVID-19 impact on prisoner and prison worker populations, we aggregated prisoner and staff COVID case and death data up through Dec. 15. Because population snapshots do not account for movement in and out of prisons since March, and because many systems have significantly slowed the number of new people being sent to prison, it’s difficult to estimate the total number of people who have been held in a state system since March. To be conservative, we calculated our rates of infection using the largest prisoner population snapshots we had during this time period.

As with all COVID-19 data, our understanding of the spread and impact of the virus is limited by the availability of testing. Epidemiology and public health experts say that aside from a few states that have recently begun aggressively testing in prisons, it is likely that there are more cases of COVID-19 circulating undetected in facilities. Sixteen prison systems, including the Federal Bureau of Prisons, would not release information about how many prisoners they are testing.

Corrections departments in Indiana, Kansas, Montana, North Dakota and Wisconsin report coronavirus testing and case data for juvenile facilities; West Virginia reports figures for juvenile facilities and jails. For consistency of comparison with other state prison systems, we removed those facilities from our data that had been included prior to July 28. For these states we have also removed staff data. Similarly, Pennsylvania’s coronavirus data includes testing and cases for those who have been released on parole. We removed these tests and cases for prisoners from the data prior to July 28. The staff cases remain.

About the Data

There are four tables in this data:

• covid_prison_cases.csv contains weekly time series data on tests, infections and deaths in prisons. The first dates in the table are on March 26. Any questions that a prison agency could not or would not answer are left blank.

• prison_populations.csv contains snapshots of the population of people incarcerated in each of these prison systems for whom data on COVID testing and cases are available. This varies by state and may not always be the entire number of people incarcerated in each system. In some states, it may include other populations, such as those on parole or held in state-run jails. This data is primarily for use in calculating rates of testing and infection, and we would not recommend using these numbers to compare the change in how many people are being held in each prison system.

• staff_populations.csv contains a one-time, recent snapshot of the headcount of workers for each prison agency, collected as close to April 15 as possible.

• covid_prison_rates.csv contains the rates of cases and deaths for prisoners. There is one row for every state and federal prison system and an additional row with the National totals.

Queries

The Associated Press and The Marshall Project have created several queries to help you use this data:

Get your state's prison COVID data: Provides each week's data from just your state and calculates a cases-per-100000-prisoners rate, a deaths-per-100000-prisoners rate, a cases-per-100000-workers rate and a deaths-per-100000-workers rate here

Rank all systems' most recent data by cases per 100,000 prisoners here

Find what percentage of your state's total cases and deaths -- as reported by Johns Hopkins University -- occurred within the prison system here

Attribution

In stories, attribute this data to: “According to an analysis of state prison cases by The Marshall Project, a nonprofit investigative newsroom dedicated to the U.S. criminal justice system, and The Associated Press.”

Contributors

Many reporters and editors at The Marshall Project and The Associated Press contributed to this data, including: Katie Park, Tom Meagher, Weihua Li, Gabe Isman, Cary Aspinwall, Keri Blakinger, Jake Bleiberg, Andrew R. Calderón, Maurice Chammah, Andrew DeMillo, Eli Hager, Jamiles Lartey, Claudia Lauer, Nicole Lewis, Humera Lodhi, Colleen Long, Joseph Neff, Michelle Pitcher, Alysia Santo, Beth Schwartzapfel, Damini Sharma, Colleen Slevin, Christie Thompson, Abbie VanSickle, Adria Watson, Andrew Welsh-Huggins.

Questions

If you have questions about the data, please email The Marshall Project at info+covidtracker@themarshallproject.org or file a Github issue.

To learn more about AP's data journalism capabilities for publishers, corporations and financial institutions, go here or email kromano@ap.org.

Introduction

There are several works based on Natural Language Processing on newspaper reports. Mining opinions from headlines [ 1 ] using Standford NLP and SVM by Rameshbhaiet. Al.compared several algorithms on a small and large dataset. Rubinet. al., in their paper [ 2 ], created a mechanism to differentiate fake news from real ones by building a set of characteristics of news according to their types. The purpose was to contribute to the low resource data available for training machine learning algorithms. Doumitet. al.in [ 3 ] have implemented LDA, a topic modeling approach to study bias present in online news media.

However, there are not many NLP research invested in studying COVID-19. Most applications include classification of chest X-rays and CT-scans to detect presence of pneumonia in lungs [ 4 ], a consequence of the virus. Other research areas include studying the genome sequence of the virus[ 5 ][ 6 ][ 7 ] and replicating its structure to fight and find a vaccine. This research is crucial in battling the pandemic. The few NLP based research publications are sentiment classification of online tweets by Samuel et el [ 8 ] to understand fear persisting in people due to the virus. Similar work has been done using the LSTM network to classify sentiments from online discussion forums by Jelodaret. al.[ 9 ]. NKK dataset is the first study on a comparatively larger dataset of a newspaper report on COVID-19, which contributed to the virus’s awareness to the best of our knowledge.

2 Data-set Introduction

2.1 Data Collection

We accumulated 1000 online newspaper report from United States of America (USA) on COVID-19. The newspaper includes The Washington Post (USA) and StarTribune (USA). We have named it as “Covid-News-USA-NNK”. We also accumulated 50 online newspaper report from Bangladesh on the issue and named it “Covid-News-BD-NNK”. The newspaper includes The Daily Star (BD) and Prothom Alo (BD). All these newspapers are from the top provider and top read in the respective countries. The collection was done manually by 10 human data-collectors of age group 23- with university degrees. This approach was suitable compared to automation to ensure the news were highly relevant to the subject. The newspaper online sites had dynamic content with advertisements in no particular order. Therefore there were high chances of online scrappers to collect inaccurate news reports. One of the challenges while collecting the data is the requirement of subscription. Each newspaper required $1 per subscriptions. Some criteria in collecting the news reports provided as guideline to the human data-collectors were as follows:

• The headline must have one or more words directly or indirectly related to COVID-19.
• The content of each news must have 5 or more keywords directly or indirectly related to COVID-19.
• The genre of the news can be anything as long as it is relevant to the topic. Political, social, economical genres are to be more prioritized.
• Avoid taking duplicate reports.
• Maintain a time frame for the above mentioned newspapers.

To collect these data we used a google form for USA and BD. We have two human editor to go through each entry to check any spam or troll entry.

2.2 Data Pre-processing and Statistics

Some pre-processing steps performed on the newspaper report dataset are as follows:

• Remove hyperlinks.
• Remove non-English alphanumeric characters.
• Remove stop words.
• Lemmatize text.

While more pre-processing could have been applied, we tried to keep the data as much unchanged as possible since changing sentence structures could result us in valuable information loss. While this was done with help of a script, we also assigned same human collectors to cross check for any presence of the above mentioned criteria.

The primary data statistics of the two dataset are shown in Table 1 and 2.

Table 1: Covid-News-USA-NNK data statistics

No of words per
headline

7 to 20

No of words per body
content

150 to 2100

Table 2: Covid-News-BD-NNK data statistics
No of words per
headline

10 to 20

No of words per body
content

100 to 1500

2.3 Dataset Repository

We used GitHub as our primary data repository in account name NKK^1. Here, we created two repositories USA-NKK^2 and BD-NNK^3. The dataset is available in both CSV and JSON format. We are regularly updating the CSV files and regenerating JSON using a py script. We provided a python script file for essential operation. We welcome all outside collaboration to enrich the dataset.

3 Literature Review

Natural Language Processing (NLP) deals with text (also known as categorical) data in computer science, utilizing numerous diverse methods like one-hot encoding, word embedding, etc., that transform text to machine language, which can be fed to multiple machine learning and deep learning algorithms.

Some well-known applications of NLP includes fraud detection on online media sites[ 10 ], using authorship attribution in fallback authentication systems[ 11 ], intelligent conversational agents or chatbots[ 12 ] and machine translations used by Google Translate[ 13 ]. While these are all downstream tasks, several exciting developments have been made in the algorithm solely for Natural Language Processing tasks. The two most trending ones are BERT[ 14 ], which uses bidirectional encoder-decoder architecture to create the transformer model, that can do near-perfect classification tasks and next-word predictions for next generations, and GPT-3 models released by OpenAI[ 15 ] that can generate texts almost human-like. However, these are all pre-trained models since they carry huge computation cost. Information Extraction is a generalized concept of retrieving information from a dataset. Information extraction from an image could be retrieving vital feature spaces or targeted portions of an image; information extraction from speech could be retrieving information about names, places, etc[ 16 ]. Information extraction in texts could be identifying named entities and locations or essential data. Topic modeling is a sub-task of NLP and also a process of information extraction. It clusters words and phrases of the same context together into groups. Topic modeling is an unsupervised learning method that gives us a brief idea about a set of text. One commonly used topic modeling is Latent Dirichlet Allocation or LDA[17].

Keyword extraction is a process of information extraction and sub-task of NLP to extract essential words and phrases from a text. TextRank [ 18 ] is an efficient keyword extraction technique that uses graphs to calculate the weight of each word and pick the words with more weight to it.

Word clouds are a great visualization technique to understand the overall ’talk of the topic’. The clustered words give us a quick understanding of the content.

4 Our experiments and Result analysis

We used the wordcloud library^4 to create the word clouds. Figure 1 and 3 presents the word cloud of Covid-News-USA- NNK dataset by month from February to May. From the figures 1,2,3, we can point few information:

• In February, both the news paper have talked about China and source of the outbreak.
• StarTribune emphasized on Minnesota as the most concerned state. In April, it seemed to have been concerned more.
• Both the newspaper talked about the virus impacting the economy, i.e, bank, elections, administrations, markets.
• Washington Post discussed global issues more than StarTribune.
• StarTribune in February mentioned the first precautionary measurement: wearing masks, and the uncontrollable spread of the virus throughout the nation.
• While both the newspaper mentioned the outbreak in China in February, the weight of the spread in the United States are more highlighted through out March till May, displaying the critical impact caused by the virus.

We used a script to extract all numbers related to certain keywords like ’Deaths’, ’Infected’, ’Died’ , ’Infections’, ’Quarantined’, Lock-down’, ’Diagnosed’ etc from the news reports and created a number of cases for both the newspaper. Figure 4 shows the statistics of this series. From this extraction technique, we can observe that April was the peak month for the covid cases as it gradually rose from February. Both the newspaper clearly shows us that the rise in covid cases from February to March was slower than the rise from March to April. This is an important indicator of possible recklessness in preparations to battle the virus. However, the steep fall from April to May also shows the positive response against the attack. We used Vader Sentiment Analysis to extract sentiment of the headlines and the body. On average, the sentiments were from -0.5 to -0.9. Vader Sentiment scale ranges from -1(highly negative to 1(highly positive). There were some cases

where the sentiment scores of the headline and body contradicted each other,i.e., the sentiment of the headline was negative but the sentiment of the body was slightly positive. Overall, sentiment analysis can assist us sort the most concerning (most negative) news from the positive ones, from which we can learn more about the indicators related to COVID-19 and the serious impact caused by it. Moreover, sentiment analysis can also provide us information about how a state or country is reacting to the pandemic. We used PageRank algorithm to extract

Along with COVID-19 pandemic we are also fighting an `infodemic'. Fake news and rumors are rampant on social media. Believing in rumors can cause significant harm. This is further exacerbated at the time of a pandemic. To tackle this, we curate and release a manually annotated dataset of 10,700 social media posts and articles of real and fake news on COVID-19. We benchmark the annotated dataset with four machine learning baselines - Decision Tree, Logistic Regression , Gradient Boost , and Support Vector Machine (SVM). We obtain the best performance of 93.46\% F1-score with SVM.

Context The dataset contains the list of COVID Fake News/Claims which is shared all over the internet. Content Headlines: String attribute consisting of the headlines/fact shared. Outcome: It is binary data where 0 means the headline is fake and 1 means that it is true. Inspiration In many research portals, there was this common question in which the combined fake news dataset is available or not. This led to the publication of this dataset.

Abstract

JHU Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases, by country

Documentation

PHS is updating the Coronavirus Global Cases dataset weekly, Monday, Wednesday and Friday from Cloud Marketplace.

This data comes from the data repository for the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Visual Dashboard operated by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering (JHU CSSE). This database was created in response to the Coronavirus public health emergency to track reported cases in real-time. The data include the location and number of confirmed COVID-19 cases, deaths, and recoveries for all affected countries, aggregated at the appropriate province or state. It was developed to enable researchers, public health authorities and the general public to track the outbreak as it unfolds. Additional information is available in the blog post.

Visual Dashboard (desktop): https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

Section 2

Included Data Sources are:

• World Health Organization (WHO): https://www.who.int/
• DXY.cn. Pneumonia. 2020. http://3g.dxy.cn/newh5/view/pneumonia.
• BNO News: https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/02/the-latest-coronavirus-cases/
• National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China (NHC): http://www.nhc.gov.cn/xcs/yqtb/list_gzbd.shtml
• China CDC (CCDC): http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/news/TrackingtheEpidemic.htm
• Hong Kong Department of Health: https://www.chp.gov.hk/en/features/102465.html
• Macau Government: https://www.ssm.gov.mo/portal/
• Taiwan CDC: https://sites.google.com/cdc.gov.tw/2019ncov/taiwan?authuser=0
• US CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/index.html
• Government of Canada: https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/coronavirus.html
• Australia Government Department of Health: https://www.health.gov.au/news/coronavirus-update-at-a-glance
• European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC): https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/geographical-distribution-2019-ncov-cases
• Ministry of Health Singapore (MOH): https://www.moh.gov.sg/covid-19
• Italy Ministry of Health: http://www.salute.gov.it/nuovocoronavirus
• 1Point3Arces: https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en
• WorldoMeters: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

%3C!-- --%3E

Section 3

**Terms of Use: **

This GitHub repo and its contents herein, including all data, mapping, and analysis, copyright 2020 Johns Hopkins University, all rights reserved, is provided to the public strictly for educational and academic research purposes. The Website relies upon publicly available data from multiple sources, that do not always agree. The Johns Hopkins University hereby disclaims any and all representations and warranties with respect to the Website, including accuracy, fitness for use, and merchantability. Reliance on the Website for medical guidance or use of the Website in commerce is strictly prohibited.

Section 4

**U.S. county-level characteristics relevant to COVID-19 **

Chin, Kahn, Krieger, Buckee, Balsari and Kiang (forthcoming) show that counties differ significantly in biological, demographic and socioeconomic factors that are associated with COVID-19 vulnerability. A range of publicly available county-specific data identifying these key factors, guided by international experiences and consideration of epidemiological parameters of importance, have been combined by the authors and are available for use:

https://github.com/mkiang/county_preparedness/

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) Press Briefings Corpus is a work in progress to collect and present in a machine readable text dataset of the daily briefings from around the world by government authorities. During the peak of the pandemic, most countries around the world informed their citizens of the status of the pandemic (usually involving an update on the number of infection cases, number of deaths) and other policy-oriented decisions about dealing with the health crisis, such as advice about what to do to reduce the spread of the epidemic.

Usually daily briefings did not occur on a Sunday.

At the moment the dataset includes:

UK/England: Daily Press Briefings by UK Government between 12 March 2020 - 01 June 2020 (70 briefings in total)

Scotland: Daily Press Briefings by Scottish Government between 3 March 2020 - 01 June 2020 (76 briefings in total)

Wales: Daily Press Briefings by Welsh Government between 23 March 2020 - 01 June 2020 (56 briefings in total)

Northern Ireland: Daily Press Briefings by N. Ireland Assembly between 23 March 2020 - 01 June 2020 (56 briefings in total)

World Health Organisation: Press Briefings occuring usually every 2 days between 22 January 2020 - 01 June 2020 (63 briefings in total)

More countries will be added in due course, and we will be keeping this updated to cover the latest daily briefings available.

The corpus is compiled to allow for further automated political discourse analysis (classification).

This dataset presents a large-scale collection of millions of Twitter posts related to the coronavirus pandemic in Spanish language. The collection was built by monitoring public posts written in Spanish containing a diverse set of hashtags related to the COVID-19, as well as tweets shared by the official Argentinian government offices, such as ministries and secretaries at different levels. Data was collected between March and August 2020 using the Twitter API.

In addition to tweets IDs, the dataset includes information about mentions, retweets, media, URLs, hashtags, replies, users and content-based user relations, allowing the observation of the dynamics of the shared information. Data is presented in different tables that can be analysed separately or combined.

The dataset aims at serving as source for studying several coronavirus effects in people through social media, including the impact of public policies, the perception of risk and related disease consequences, the adoption of guidelines, the emergence, dynamics and propagation of disinformation and rumours, the formation of communities and other social phenomena, the evolution of health related indicators (such as fear, stress, sleep disorders, or children behaviour changes), among other possibilities. In this sense, the dataset can be useful for multi-disciplinary researchers related to the different fields of data science, social network analysis, social computing, medical informatics, social sciences, among others.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) time series that lists confirmed cases, reported deaths, and reported recoveries. Data is broken down by country (and sometimes by sub-region).

Coronavirus disease (COVID19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV2) and has had an effect worldwide. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it a pandemic, currently indicating more than 118,000 cases of coronavirus disease in more than 110 countries and territories around the world.

This dataset contains the latest news related to Covid-19 and it was fetched with the help of Newsdata.io news API.

A global survey conducted in March 2020 revealed that the coronavirus has had a direct impact on in-home media consumption around the world, with 35 percent of total respondents professing to have read more books or listened to more audiobooks at home and 18 percent having listened to more radio due to the COVID-19 pandemic, whilst more than 40 percent of consumers spent longer on messaging services and social media. Interestingly, although at least 50 percent of respondents in most countries said that they were watching more news coverage, figures for Australia and the United States were lower, amounting to just 42 and 43 percent respectively. Australians were also the least likely to be reading more newspapers; just five percent of consumers said that they were doing so compared to the global total of 14 percent. Whilst 60 percent of Italians were spending longer on messaging services, in Japan the same was true for only eight percent of respondents, and survey participants from China and the Philippines were by far the most likely to be spending more time on music streaming services.For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Fact and Figures page.

This dataset contains metadata about all Covid-related YouTube videos which circulated on public social media, but which YouTube eventually removed because they contained false information. It describes 8,122 videos that were shared between November 2019 and June 2020. The dataset contains unique identifiers for the videos and social media accounts that shared the videos, statistics on social media engagement and metadata such as video titles and view counts where they were recoverable. We publish the data alongside the code used to produce on Github. The dataset has reuse potential for research studying narratives related to the coronavirus, the impact of social media on knowledge about health and the politics of social media platforms.

Changelog:

Update September 20, 2021: Data and overview updated to reflect data used in the September 15 story Over Half of States Have Rolled Back Public Health Powers in Pandemic. It includes 303 state or local public health leaders who resigned, retired or were fired between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021. Previous versions of this dataset reflected data used in the Dec. 2020 and April 2021 stories.

Overview

Across the U.S., state and local public health officials have found themselves at the center of a political storm as they combat the worst pandemic in a century. Amid a fractured federal response, the usually invisible army of workers charged with preventing the spread of infectious disease has become a public punching bag.

In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, at least 303 state or local public health leaders in 41 states have resigned, retired or been fired since April 1, 2020, according to an ongoing investigation by The Associated Press and KHN.

According to experts, that is the largest exodus of public health leaders in American history.

Many left due to political blowback or pandemic pressure, as they became the target of groups that have coalesced around a common goal — fighting and even threatening officials over mask orders and well-established public health activities like quarantines and contact tracing. Some left to take higher profile positions, or due to health concerns. Others were fired for poor performance. Dozens retired. An untold number of lower level staffers have also left.

The result is a further erosion of the nation’s already fragile public health infrastructure, which KHN and the AP documented beginning in 2020 in the Underfunded and Under Threat project.

Findings

The AP and KHN found that:

• One in five Americans live in a community that has lost its local public health department leader during the pandemic
• Top public health officials in 28 states have left state-level departments ## Using this data To filter for data specific to your state, use this query

To get total numbers of exits by state, broken down by state and local departments, use this query

Methodology

KHN and AP counted how many state and local public health leaders have left their jobs between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021.

The government tasks public health workers with improving the health of the general population, through their work to encourage healthy living and prevent infectious disease. To that end, public health officials do everything from inspecting water and food safety to testing the nation’s babies for metabolic diseases and contact tracing cases of syphilis.

Many parts of the country have a health officer and a health director/administrator by statute. The analysis counted both of those positions if they existed. For state-level departments, the count tracks people in the top and second-highest-ranking job.

The analysis includes exits of top department officials regardless of reason, because no matter the reason, each left a vacancy at the top of a health agency during the pandemic. Reasons for departures include political pressure, health concerns and poor performance. Others left to take higher profile positions or to retire. Some departments had multiple top officials exit over the course of the pandemic; each is included in the analysis.

Reporters compiled the exit list by reaching out to public health associations and experts in every state and interviewing hundreds of public health employees. They also received information from the National Association of City and County Health Officials, and combed news reports and records.

Public health departments can be found at multiple levels of government. Each state has a department that handles these tasks, but most states also have local departments that either operate under local or state control. The population served by each local health department is calculated using the U.S. Census Bureau 2019 Population Estimates based on each department’s jurisdiction.

KHN and the AP have worked since the spring on a series of stories documenting the funding, staffing and problems around public health. A previous data distribution detailed a decade's worth of cuts to state and local spending and staffing on public health. That data can be found here.

Attribution

Findings and the data should be cited as: "According to a KHN and Associated Press report."

Is Data Missing?

If you know of a public health official in your state or area who has left that position between April 1, 2020 and Sept. 12, 2021 and isn't currently in our dataset, please contact authors Anna Maria Barry-Jester annab@kff.org, Hannah Recht hrecht@kff.org, Michelle Smith mrsmith@ap.org and Lauren Weber laurenw@kff.org.

This is the data for the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Visual Dashboard operated by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering (JHU CSSE). Also, Supported by ESRI Living Atlas Team and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab (JHU APL).Data SourcesWorld Health Organization (WHO): https://www.who.int/ DXY.cn. Pneumonia. 2020. http://3g.dxy.cn/newh5/view/pneumonia. BNO News: https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/02/the-latest-coronavirus-cases/ National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China (NHC): http://www.nhc.gov.cn/xcs/yqtb/list_gzbd.shtml China CDC (CCDC): http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/news/TrackingtheEpidemic.htm Hong Kong Department of Health: https://www.chp.gov.hk/en/features/102465.html Macau Government: https://www.ssm.gov.mo/portal/ Taiwan CDC: https://sites.google.com/cdc.gov.tw/2019ncov/taiwan?authuser=0 US CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/index.html Government of Canada: https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/diseases/coronavirus.html Australia Government Department of Health: https://www.health.gov.au/news/coronavirus-update-at-a-glance European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC): https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/geographical-distribution-2019-ncov-casesMinistry of Health Singapore (MOH): https://www.moh.gov.sg/covid-19Italy Ministry of Health: http://www.salute.gov.it/nuovocoronavirus

JHU Has Stopped Collecting Data As Of 03/10/2023

After three years of around-the-clock tracking of COVID-19 data from around the world, Johns Hopkins has discontinued the Coronavirus Resource Center’s operations.

The site’s two raw data repositories will remain accessible for information collected from 1/22/20 to 3/10/23 on cases, deaths, vaccines, testing and demographics.

Novel Corona Virus (COVID-19) epidemiological data since 22 January 2020. The data is compiled by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering (JHU CCSE) from various sources including the World Health Organization (WHO), DXY.cn, BNO News, National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China (NHC), China CDC (CCDC), Hong Kong Department of Health, Macau Government, Taiwan CDC, US CDC, Government of Canada, Australia Government Department of Health, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), Ministry of Health Singapore (MOH), and others. JHU CCSE maintains the data on the 2019 Novel Coronavirus COVID-19 (2019-nCoV) Data Repository on Github.

Fields available in the data include Province/State, Country/Region, Last Update, Confirmed, Suspected, Recovered, Deaths.

On 23/03/2020, a new data structure was released. The current resources for the latest time series data are:

• time_series_covid19_confirmed_global.csv
• time_series_covid19_deaths_global.csv
• time_series_covid19_recovered_global.csv

---DEPRECATION WARNING---
The resources below ceased being updated on 22/03/2020 and were removed on 26/03/2020:

• time_series_19-covid-Confirmed.csv
• time_series_19-covid-Deaths.csv
• time_series_19-covid-Recovered.csv

The World Health Organization reported 6932591 Coronavirus Deaths since the epidemic began. In addition, countries reported 766440796 Coronavirus Cases. This dataset provides - World Coronavirus Deaths- actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

Overview

As coronavirus cases have exploded across the country, states have struggled to obtain sufficient personal protective equipment such as masks, face shields, gloves and ventilators to meet the needs of healthcare workers. FEMA began distributing PPE from the national stockpile as well as PPE obtained from private manufacturers to states in March.

Initially, FEMA distributed materials based primarily on population. By late March, Its methods changed to send more PPE to hotspot locations, and FEMA claimed these decisions were data-driven and need-based. By late spring, the agency was considering requests from states as well.

Although all U.S. states and territories have received some amount of PPE from FEMA, the amounts of PPE states have per capita and per positive COVID-19 case vary widely.

The AP used this data in a story that ran July 7.

Findings

• Overall, low population, rural states have the most PPE per positive case as of mid-June. This generally held true across types of equipment.
• The states that had the highest number of total PPE items per coronavirus case as of mid-May were, in descending order: Alaska, Montana, Vermont, Hawaii, Wyoming, and North Dakota. The highest was Alaska with 1,579 PPE items per coronavirus case.
• The states that had the highest number of total items per case as of mid-June were largely the same states — Montana, Alaska, Hawaii, Vermont, Wyoming, and West Virginia. The highest was Montana with 1,125 PPE items per coronavirus case.
• Conversely, the states that had the lowest amounts of PPE per positive case in mid-May included hotspot states — Massachusetts, New York, Virginia, California, Nebraska, and Iowa. New Jersey was just a couple spots further down. The lowest was Massachusetts with 36 PPE items per coronavirus case.
• The states that had the lowest amounts of PPE per case as of mid-June were largely the same as well — Massachusetts, New York, Iowa, California, and Nebraska. The lowest was Massachusetts with 32 PPE items per coronavirus case.
• When evaluated on a per-capita basis rather than per positive coronavirus case, the picture is different. The District of Columbia received the most PPE per capita in both May and June, although the vast majority of the PPE it received was distributed as of mid-May. Vermont, Kansas, New Jersey, and North Dakota had the next highest numbers of PPE per capita as of both mid-May and mid-June.
• There is no clear pattern of FEMA distribution by party control of states.

About the data

These numbers include material distributed by FEMA and also those sold by private distributors under direction from FEMA. They include materials both delivered to and en route to states.

States have purchased PPE directly in addition to receiving PPE from FEMA or directed there by the agency, and this data only includes the latter categories.

FEMA also distributed and directed the distribution of gear to U.S. territories in addition to states, which are included in FEMA’s release linked below, but not are not included in this data.

FEMA has publicly distributed its breakdown of PPE delivery by state for May and June. FEMA did not provide comprehensive numbers for each state before May.

These numbers are cumulative, meaning that the numbers for May include items of PPE distributed prior to May 14, dating to when the agency began allocations on March 1. The June numbers include the May numbers and any new PPE distributions since then.

The population column, which was used to calculate the numbers of PPE items per state, came from data from the U.S Census Bureau. Since the Census releases annual population data, population data from 2019 was used for each state.

The numbers of coronavirus cases were pulled from the data released daily by Johns Hopkins University as of the dates that FEMA released its distribution numbers — May 14 and June 10.

Caveats

The data includes amounts of gear that had been delivered to the states or were en route as of the reporting dates.

All PPE item numbers above 1 million were rounded to the nearest hundred thousand by FEMA, but numbers lower than that were not rounded.

In some cases, gear headed to a state was rerouted because it was needed more somewhere else or a state decided it did not need it. In some instances, that resulted in states having higher numbers for certain supplies in May than in June.

This dataset contains world news related to Covid-19 and vaccine and also with the news article's available metadata.