This feature service contains COVID-19 data automatically updated from the Public Health England (PHE) API service, daily. Using this API, this service takes the current day request minus two days. Therefore the data will always be two days behind. This is a result of the delay between PHE's specimen date and reporting date.The Polygon Layers, which all contain spatial data, provide information about the latest cumulative figures at three geographies; Local Authority, Regions and Nations. The Tables, which are not spatially aware, provide historical data for each feature. The format of these tables allow you to use the Join tool with the Polygon Layers and create a time enabled layer. This can be used within a dashboard or on the animation tool to view patterns over time.

In early-February 2020, the first cases of COVID-19 in the United Kingdom (UK) were confirmed. The number of cases in the UK increased significantly at the end of 2021. On January 13, 2023, the number of confirmed cases in the UK amounted to 24,243,393. COVID deaths among highest in Europe There were 202,157 confirmed coronavirus deaths in the UK as of January 13, 2023. For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

Current infection rate in Europe The current infection rate in the UK was 50 cases per 100,000 population in the last seven days as of January 16. San Marino had the highest seven day rate of infections in Europe at 336.

A survey carried out in the United Kingdom in September 2021 found that 52 percent of respondents did not take any action after encountering what they believed to be false or misleading information on the COVID-19 outbreak. Whilst this figure was lower than the share who said the same in the 2020 survey, taking no action remained the most common response to fake coronavirus news. Meanwhile, 16 percent used a fact checking site or tool to determine whether or not the information they found was true, and 14 percent turned to family or friends for help in confirming the legitimacy of news they suspected to be false.

For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

Age-standardised mortality rates (ASMRs) for deaths involving COVID-19 by ethnic group, England.

As of January 12, 2023, COVID-19 has been responsible for 202,157 deaths in the UK overall. The North West of England has been the most affected area in terms of deaths at 28,116, followed by the South East of England with 26,221 coronavirus deaths. Furthermore, there have been 22,264 mortalities in London as a result of COVID-19.

For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

Findings from the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey for England.

Based on a comparison of coronavirus deaths in 210 countries relative to their population, Peru had the most losses to COVID-19 up until July 13, 2022. As of the same date, the virus had infected over 557.8 million people worldwide, and the number of deaths had totaled more than 6.3 million. Note, however, that COVID-19 test rates can vary per country. Additionally, big differences show up between countries when combining the number of deaths against confirmed COVID-19 cases. The source seemingly does not differentiate between "the Wuhan strain" (2019-nCOV) of COVID-19, "the Kent mutation" (B.1.1.7) that appeared in the UK in late 2020, the 2021 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) from India or the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) from South Africa.

The difficulties of death figures

This table aims to provide a complete picture on the topic, but it very much relies on data that has become more difficult to compare. As the coronavirus pandemic developed across the world, countries already used different methods to count fatalities, and they sometimes changed them during the course of the pandemic. On April 16, for example, the Chinese city of Wuhan added a 50 percent increase in their death figures to account for community deaths. These deaths occurred outside of hospitals and went unaccounted for so far. The state of New York did something similar two days before, revising their figures with 3,700 new deaths as they started to include “assumed” coronavirus victims. The United Kingdom started counting deaths in care homes and private households on April 29, adjusting their number with about 5,000 new deaths (which were corrected lowered again by the same amount on August 18). This makes an already difficult comparison even more difficult. Belgium, for example, counts suspected coronavirus deaths in their figures, whereas other countries have not done that (yet). This means two things. First, it could have a big impact on both current as well as future figures. On April 16 already, UK health experts stated that if their numbers were corrected for community deaths like in Wuhan, the UK number would change from 205 to “above 300”. This is exactly what happened two weeks later. Second, it is difficult to pinpoint exactly which countries already have “revised” numbers (like Belgium, Wuhan or New York) and which ones do not. One work-around could be to look at (freely accessible) timelines that track the reported daily increase of deaths in certain countries. Several of these are available on our platform, such as for Belgium, Italy and Sweden. A sudden large increase might be an indicator that the domestic sources changed their methodology.

Where are these numbers coming from?

The numbers shown here were collected by Johns Hopkins University, a source that manually checks the data with domestic health authorities. For the majority of countries, this is from national authorities. In some cases, like China, the United States, Canada or Australia, city reports or other various state authorities were consulted. In this statistic, these separately reported numbers were put together. For more information or other freely accessible content, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

In a survey carried out in the United Kingdom in September 2021, five percent of respondents said that they had encountered news or information about the coronavirus that they believed to be false or misleading 20 times or more per day in the last week. This marked an increase of two percent from the share who said the same in the survey wave held in September 2020. Meanwhile, 24 percent of respondents believed they had seen fake news about COVID-19 a few times a week in September 2021.

For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

Estimates of differences in coronavirus (COVID-19) mortality risk by self-reported disability status for deaths occurring up to 9 March 2022, using linked data from the Office for National Statistics’ Public Health Data Asset.

A survey carried out in the United Kingdom in September 2021 revealed that the main source used for news on COVID-19 among consumers aged 16 to 24 years old was the BBC, with 51 percent saying that they went to a BBC platform for coronavirus updates in the last week. The same share of respondents in that age group also used social media for COVID-19 information, whereas older consumers were more likely to read newspapers.

For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

The number of deaths registered in England and Wales due to and involving coronavirus (COVID-19). Breakdowns include age, sex, region, local authority, Middle-layer Super Output Area (MSOA), indices of deprivation and place of death. Includes age-specific and age-standardised mortality rates.

The COVID-19 Health Inequalities Monitoring in England (CHIME) tool brings together data relating to the direct impacts of coronavirus (COVID-19) on factors such as mortality rates, hospital admissions, confirmed cases and vaccinations.

By presenting inequality breakdowns - including by age, sex, ethnic group, level of deprivation and region - the tool provides a single point of access to:

• show how inequalities have changed during the course of the pandemic and what the current cumulative picture is
• bring together data in one tool to enable users to access and use the intelligence more easily
• provide indicators with a consistent methodology across different data sets to facilitate understanding
• support users to identify and address inequalities within their areas, and identify priority areas for recovery

In the March 2023 update, data has been updated for deaths, hospital admissions and vaccinations. Data on inequalities in vaccination uptake within upper tier local authorities has been added to the tool for the first time. This replaces data for lower tier local authorities, published in December 2022, allowing the reporting of a wider range of inequality breakdowns within these areas.

Please send any questions or comments to PHA-OHID@dhsc.gov.uk

Headline estimates for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. 

Pre-existing conditions of people who died due to COVID-19, broken down by country, broad age group, and place of death occurrence, usual residents of England and Wales.

Context

Within the current response of a pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, which in turn causes the disease, called COVID-19. It is necessary to join forces to minimize the effects of this disease.

Therefore, the intention of this dataset is to save data scientists time:

• Gather the data at the country level, encoding the country with its ISO code to allow easy access to other data
• Perform pre-processing of data, calculations of increments and other indicators that can facilitate modeling.
• Add the response of the governments over time so that it can be taken into account in the modeling.
• Daily update.

This dataset is not intended to be static, so suggestions for expanding it are welcome. If someone considers it important to add information, please let me know.

Content

The data contained in this dataset comes mainly from the following sources:

Source: Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19 Provided by Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering (JHU CSSE): https://systems.jhu.edu/

Source: OXFORD COVID-19 GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TRACKER https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/research/research-projects/oxford-covid-19-government-response-tracker Hale, Thomas and Samuel Webster (2020). Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. Data use policy: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY standard.

The original data is updated daily.

The features it includes are:

• Country Name

• Country Code ISO 3166 Alpha 3

• Date

• Incidence data:

  • confirmed
  • deaths
  • recoveries

• Daily increments:

  • confirmed_inc
  • deaths_inc
  • recoveries_inc

• Empirical Contagion Rate - ECR

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F3508582%2F3e90ecbcdf76dfbbee54a21800f5e0d6%2FECR.jpg?generation=1586861653126435&alt=media" alt="">

• GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TRACKER - GRTStringencyIndex

  OXFORD COVID-19 GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TRACKER - Stringency Index

• Indices from Start Contagion

  • Days since the first case of contagion is overcome
  • Days since 100 cases are exceeded

• Percentages over the country's population:

  • confirmed_PopPct
  • deaths_PopPct
  • recoveries_PopPct

The method of obtaining the data and its transformations can be seen in the notebook:

Notebook COVID-19 Data by country with Government Response

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

In-depth analysis of Winter Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Study data looking at trends in self-reported symptoms of coronavirus (COVID-19), including ongoing symptoms and associated risk factors.

Some 33 percent of respondents in the United States were satisfied with their fellow citizens’ response to the coronavirus pandemic on May 31, 2020. Are people satisfied with the media’s response to the coronavirus? As of March to May 2020, all over the world, people were watching news coverage more than usual due to the coronavirus outbreak. A lot of respondents seem to want to keep in-line with the latest trends of a pandemic that has effectively crippled many of the world’s biggest economies. Consumers of several age groups between 16 and 64 are watching news with a greater frequency which also means a greater scrutiny for the media outlets. In the U.S., where millions of people have filed for unemployment benefits since the corona outbreak, more than one third of respondents were satisfied with media’s response to COVID-19 as of May 3rd, 2020. However, a considerable share of respondents in the U.S. believe that media has overstated news related to coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. That goes for audiences from both democrat and republican-supporting groups as they believe that the media outlets have either slightly or greatly exaggerated news about COVID-19.