The Montana COVID-19 Case and Test Data feature service hosts COVID-19 statistics for the state of Montana by county. The data is derived from local health officials at the county level who report cases to the Montana Department of Health and Human Services. DPHHS tabulates case data and then gives the data to the Montana State Library to publish through this web service. The daily updates are managed by the Disaster and Emergency Service State Emergency Coordination Center. The feature service is comprised of Montana's county geography with attributes that summarize Total COVID-19 cases by age (10-year groups), by sex (M/F/U), new cases, total deaths, hospitalization count, total recovered and the number of total active cases. The two tables store various stats that include the total number of tests completed, and the number of new tests completed for individual test dates; and individual case data which includes age group, sex, county or residence and recovery status.

The dashboard includes COVID-19 data pertaining to Montana COVID-19 cases and a global outbreak information. Montana COVID-19 cases include COVID-19 cases (total confirmed, new daily, and active cases, demographics information), deaths and vaccination by county and statewide total deaths, total tests, recovered cases, active cases, vaccinations and hospitalizations (total and active hospitalizations). Dashboard is open to the public.

Table tabulating all reported cases of COVID-19 by case. Attributes include the date reported to Communicable Disease Epidemiology Program (CDEpi), county of residence, age group, sex, hospitalization status, outcome, and the onset date.

With the federal COVID-19 Public Health Emergency ending on May 11th, the Montana Department of Health & Human Services will discontinue weekly updates to the COVID-19 case tracking and vaccine map dashboards and feature services. The last weekly update to the dashboards will take place on May 5th, 2023. After this final data update, the dashboards will remain available to viewers until July 14th, 2023. However, it should be noted that data will not be current after May 5th, 2023.To access up-to-date COVID-19 data for Montana after 5/11/2023, visit the CDC’s COVID Data Tracker website: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-trackerThe Montana COVID-19 Vaccination Data web service hosts COVID-19 vaccination statistics for the state of Montana. The Department of Health and Human Service tabulates vaccination data and then gives the data to the Montana State Library to update the number of vaccine doses administered (daily) and Montana county vaccination data (weekly). Montana public health agencies and the Governor's Coronavirus task Force are actively working to limit the spread of novel coronavirus in Montana. The Montana State Library is aiding this effort by geo-enabling public health information and emergency response data to help decision-makers, State Emergency Coordination Center and the Governor's Coronavirus Task Force understand the spread of the disease.

Reporting of Aggregate Case and Death Count data was discontinued May 11, 2023, with the expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration. Although these data will continue to be publicly available, this dataset will no longer be updated.

This archived public use dataset has 11 data elements reflecting United States COVID-19 community levels for all available counties.

The COVID-19 community levels were developed using a combination of three metrics — new COVID-19 admissions per 100,000 population in the past 7 days, the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients, and total new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. The COVID-19 community level was determined by the higher of the new admissions and inpatient beds metrics, based on the current level of new cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. New COVID-19 admissions and the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied represent the current potential for strain on the health system. Data on new cases acts as an early warning indicator of potential increases in health system strain in the event of a COVID-19 surge.

Using these data, the COVID-19 community level was classified as low, medium, or high.

COVID-19 Community Levels were used to help communities and individuals make decisions based on their local context and their unique needs. Community vaccination coverage and other local information, like early alerts from surveillance, such as through wastewater or the number of emergency department visits for COVID-19, when available, can also inform decision making for health officials and individuals.

For the most accurate and up-to-date data for any county or state, visit the relevant health department website. COVID Data Tracker may display data that differ from state and local websites. This can be due to differences in how data were collected, how metrics were calculated, or the timing of web updates.

Archived Data Notes:

This dataset was renamed from "United States COVID-19 Community Levels by County as Originally Posted" to "United States COVID-19 Community Levels by County" on March 31, 2022.

March 31, 2022: Column name for county population was changed to “county_population”. No change was made to the data points previous released.

March 31, 2022: New column, “health_service_area_population”, was added to the dataset to denote the total population in the designated Health Service Area based on 2019 Census estimate.

March 31, 2022: FIPS codes for territories American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and United States Virgin Islands were re-formatted to 5-digit numeric for records released on 3/3/2022 to be consistent with other records in the dataset.

March 31, 2022: Changes were made to the text fields in variables “county”, “state”, and “health_service_area” so the formats are consistent across releases.

March 31, 2022: The “%” sign was removed from the text field in column “covid_inpatient_bed_utilization”. No change was made to the data. As indicated in the column description, values in this column represent the percentage of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients (7-day average).

March 31, 2022: Data values for columns, “county_population”, “health_service_area_number”, and “health_service_area” were backfilled for records released on 2/24/2022. These columns were added since the week of 3/3/2022, thus the values were previously missing for records released the week prior.

April 7, 2022: Updates made to data released on 3/24/2022 for Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and United States Virgin Islands to correct a data mapping error.

April 21, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for counties in Nebraska for the week of April 21, 2022 have 3 counties identified in the high category and 37 in the medium category. CDC has been working with state officials to verify the data submitted, as other data systems are not providing alerts for substantial increases in disease transmission or severity in the state.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for McCracken County, KY for the week of May 5, 2022 have been updated to correct a data processing error. McCracken County, KY should have appeared in the low community level category during the week of May 5, 2022. This correction is reflected in this update.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for several Florida counties for the week of May 19th, 2022, have been corrected for a data processing error. Of note, Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach Counties should have appeared in the high CCL category, and Osceola County should have appeared in the medium CCL category. These corrections are reflected in this update.

May 26, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Orange County, New York for the week of May 26, 2022 displayed an erroneous case rate of zero and a CCL category of low due to a data source error. This county should have appeared in the medium CCL category.

June 2, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Tolland County, CT for the week of May 26, 2022 have been updated to correct a data processing error. Tolland County, CT should have appeared in the medium community level category during the week of May 26, 2022. This correction is reflected in this update.

June 9, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Tolland County, CT for the week of May 26, 2022 have been updated to correct a misspelling. The medium community level category for Tolland County, CT on the week of May 26, 2022 was misspelled as “meduim” in the data set. This correction is reflected in this update.

June 9, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Mississippi counties for the week of June 9, 2022 should be interpreted with caution due to a reporting cadence change over the Memorial Day holiday that resulted in artificially inflated case rates in the state.

July 7, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Rock County, Minnesota for the week of July 7, 2022 displayed an artificially low case rate and CCL category due to a data source error. This county should have appeared in the high CCL category.

July 14, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Massachusetts counties for the week of July 14, 2022 should be interpreted with caution due to a reporting cadence change that resulted in lower than expected case rates and CCL categories in the state.

July 28, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for all Montana counties for the week of July 21, 2022 had case rates of 0 due to a reporting issue. The case rates have been corrected in this update.

July 28, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released for Alaska for all weeks prior to July 21, 2022 included non-resident cases. The case rates for the time series have been corrected in this update.

July 28, 2022: A laboratory in Nevada reported a backlog of historic COVID-19 cases. As a result, the 7-day case count and rate will be inflated in Clark County, NV for the week of July 28, 2022.

August 4, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data was updated on August 2, 2022 in error during performance testing. Data for the week of July 28, 2022 was changed during this update due to additional case and hospital data as a result of late reporting between July 28, 2022 and August 2, 2022. Since the purpose of this data set is to provide point-in-time views of COVID-19 Community Levels on Thursdays, any changes made to the data set during the August 2, 2022 update have been reverted in this update.

August 4, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of July 28, 2022 for 8 counties in Utah (Beaver County, Daggett County, Duchesne County, Garfield County, Iron County, Kane County, Uintah County, and Washington County) case data was missing due to data collection issues. CDC and its partners have resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 4, 2022: Due to a reporting cadence change, case rates for all Alabama counties will be lower than expected. As a result, the CCL levels published on August 4, 2022 should be interpreted with caution.

August 11, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of August 4, 2022 for South Carolina have been updated to correct a data collection error that resulted in incorrect case data. CDC and its partners have resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 18, 2022: COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data for the week of August 11, 2022 for Connecticut have been updated to correct a data ingestion error that inflated the CT case rates. CDC, in collaboration with CT, has resolved the issue and the correction is reflected in this update.

August 25, 2022: A laboratory in Tennessee reported a backlog of historic COVID-19 cases. As a result, the 7-day case count and rate may be inflated in many counties and the CCLs published on August 25, 2022 should be interpreted with caution.

August 25, 2022: Due to a data source error, the 7-day case rate for St. Louis County, Missouri, is reported as zero in the COVID-19 Community Level data released on August 25, 2022. Therefore, the COVID-19 Community Level for this county should be interpreted with caution.

September 1, 2022: Due to a reporting issue, case rates for all Nebraska counties will include 6 days of data instead of 7 days in the COVID-19 Community Level (CCL) data released on September 1, 2022. Therefore, the CCLs for all Nebraska counties should be interpreted with caution.

September 8, 2022: Due to a data processing error, the case rate for Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania,

The Montana COVID-19 Community Levels Table web service hosts a data table showing Montana COVID-19 CDC Community Levels data. This public use dataset has 11 data elements reflecting Montana COVID-19 community levels for all available counties. CDC looks at the combination of three metrics — new COVID-19 admissions per 100,000 population in the past 7 days, the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients, and total new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days — to determine the COVID-19 community level. The COVID-19 community level is determined by the higher of the new admissions and inpatient beds metrics, based on the current level of new cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days. New COVID-19 admissions and the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied represent the current potential for strain on the health system. Data on new cases acts as an early warning indicator of potential increases in health system strain in the event of a COVID-19 surge. COVID-19 Community Levels can help communities and individuals make decisions based on their local context and their unique needs. Community vaccination coverage and other local information, like early alerts from surveillance, such as through wastewater or the number of emergency department visits for COVID-19, when available, can also inform decision making for health officials and individuals. This feature service is no longer maintained and the final update to this data was made on 05/05/2023.

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.

Project Tycho datasets contain case counts for reported disease conditions for countries around the world. The Project Tycho data curation team extracts these case counts from various reputable sources, typically from national or international health authorities, such as the US Centers for Disease Control or the World Health Organization. These original data sources include both open- and restricted-access sources. For restricted-access sources, the Project Tycho team has obtained permission for redistribution from data contributors. All datasets contain case count data that are identical to counts published in the original source and no counts have been modified in any way by the Project Tycho team, except for aggregation of individual case count data into daily counts when that was the best data available for a disease and location. The Project Tycho team has pre-processed datasets by adding new variables, such as standard disease and location identifiers, that improve data interpretability. We also formatted the data into a standard data format. All geographic locations at the country and admin1 level have been represented at the same geographic level as in the data source, provided an ISO code or codes could be identified, unless the data source specifies that the location is listed at an inaccurate geographical level. For more information about decisions made by the curation team, recommended data processing steps, and the data sources used, please see the README that is included in the dataset download ZIP file.

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 Project Tycho dataset includes a CSV file with COVID-19 data reported in UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: 2019-12-30 - 2021-07-31. It contains counts of cases, deaths, hospitalizations, and demographics. Data for this Project Tycho dataset comes from: "Alabama Department of Public Health Website Dashboard", "Arkansas Department of Health COVID-19 Website Dashboard", "California Health and Human Services Open Data Portal, California Department of Public Health COVID-19 Data", "Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Open Data Website", "Connecticut Open Data Website, Department of Public Health COVID-19 Data", "Delaware Environmental Public Health Tracking Network, Delaware Health and Social Services Website", "Georgia Department of Public Health Website", "Illinois Department of Public Health Website", "Indiana Data Hub Website, Indiana State Department of Health COVID-19 Data", "COVID-19 Data Repository by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University", "Kentucky Department of Public Health COVID-19 Website Dashboard", "Maine Center for Disease Control & Prevention; Division of the Maine Department of Health and Human Services Website", "Maryland Department of Health COVID-19 Website Dashboard", "Minnesota Department of Health COVID-19 Website Dashboard", "Montana Department of Health & Human Services COVID-19 Website Dashboard", "New York State Department of Health Data Website", "COVID-19 Data Repository by The New York Times", "Ohio Department of Health COVID-19 website", "Pennsylvania Department of Health Data Website", "Tennessee Department of Health Website", "Texas Department of Health Services Website", "United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19 Response", "Vermont Department of Health, Vermont Center for Geographic Information Open Geodata Portal", "Virginia Department of Health Website", "European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control Website", "World Health Organization COVID-19 Dashboard". The data have been pre-processed into the standard Project Tycho data format v1.1.

The ClinSpEn-CC (clinical case) dataset is a collection of EN-ES parallel COVID-19 clinical case reports to be used in the 2022 Workshop of Machine Translation (WMT)'s Biomedical Translation Task.

The dataset’s case reports were carefully selected to cover a wide range of aspects related to the disease: different types of patients (children, adults, elderly and pregnant people, babies), different comorbidities (cancer, mental health issues, immunosuppressed patients) and symptomatology (mild and severe presentations, dermatologic, immunologic and psychiatric manifestations, thrombosis, …). The reports were translated from English to Spanish by a professional medical translator on a first step and revised by a clinical expert on a second step.

ClinSpEn-CC includes a total of 202 case reports, which amount to almost 4 000 sentences. Each file is duplicated, with the Spanish version having a “.es” extension and the English files having a “.en” extension. Each report has been parallelized so that every sentence’s line number corresponds to the same sentence’s line number in both languages.

This repository contains a sample set of 50 cases.

Related Links:

- Data website with more information: https://temu.bsc.es/clinspen/

- WMT website (includes schedule, registration, ...): https://www.statmt.org/wmt22/

ClinSpEn SAMPLE SETS:

- ClinSpEn-CC Sample Set (Clinical Cases): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6497350

- ClinSpEn-CT Sample Set (Clinical Terms): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6497372

- ClinSpEn-OC Sample Set (Ontology Concepts): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6497388

ClinSpEn TEST SETS:

- ClinSpEn-CC Test Set (Clinical Cases): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6948634

- ClinSpEn-CT Test Set (Clinical Terms): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6948669

- ClinSpEn-OC Test Set (Ontology Concepts): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6948679

ClinSpEn Parallel Corpus Collection

This repository contains the complete ClinSpEn corpus collection, which was used for the ClinSpEn shared task at Biomedical WMT 2022.

ClinSpEn is a collection of Gold Standard EN-ES parallel corpora of different types of clinical data: case reports, medical controlled vocabularies/ontologies, and clinical terms and entities extracted from medical content. It includes development and test data translated by professional medical translators that can be used to train and benchmark clinical EN-ES machine translation systems. Additionally, monolingual background data is provided so that the systems' performance can be analyzed in unseen data.

If you use this dataset, please cite:

inproceedings{biowmt22,
 title={Findings of the WMT 2022 Biomedical Translation Shared Task: Monolingual Clinical Case Reports},
 author={Neves, Mariana and Yepes, Antonio Jimeno and Siu, Amy and Roller, Roland and Thomas, Philippe and Navarro, Maika Vicente and Yeganova, Lana and Wiemann, Dina and Di Nunzio, Giorgio Maria and Vezzani, Federica and others},
 booktitle={WMT22-Seventh Conference on Machine Translation},
 pages={694--723},
 year={2022}
}

Data Description

ClinSpEn proposes three different sub-tracks, each based on a different type of clinical data:

1. Clinical Cases:

Parallel EN-ES COVID-19 clinical case reports. The direction of this sub-track is EN>ES.

The dataset’s case reports were carefully selected to cover a wide range of aspects related to the disease: different types of patients (children, adults, elderly and pregnant people, babies), different comorbidities (cancer, mental health issues, immunosuppressed patients) and symptomatology (mild and severe presentations, dermatologic, immunologic and psychiatric manifestations, thrombosis, ...). The reports were translated from English to Spanish by a professional medical translator on a first step and revised by a clinical expert on a second step.

The sample (dev) set and test set are made up of parallel txt files (50 and 152 documents each, respectively), with the Spanish version having a “.es” extension and the English files having a “.en” extension. Each report has been parallelized so that every sentence’s line number corresponds to the same sentence’s line number in both languages.

The background data (9,804 files) is made up of a TSV file with four columns: filename, document number, line number and English line. The clinical cases themselves include COVID-19 case reports as well as diverse content extracted from PubMed.

If you need to map the entries in the join test + background document provided in earlier versions, you may use the "clinspen_clinicalcases_test-set_filename_mapping.tsv" file.

2. Clinical Terminology:

Parallel EN-ES clinical terms extracted from medical literature and clinical records, with particular focus on diseases, symptoms, findings, procedures and professions and translated and revised by professional medical translators. The direction of this sub-track is ES>EN.

The sample (dev) set contains 7,000 terms as a tab-separated file (TSV), with the first column corresponding to English terms and the second column to Spanish terms.

The test data (12,128 terms) is made up of a TSV file with three columns: term number, English term and Spanish term.

The background data (201,890 terms) is made up of a TSV file with two columns: term number and Spanish term.

The term number columns can be used to map the entries in the join test + background document provided in earlier versions.

3. Ontology Concepts:

Parallel EN-ES concepts extracted from various open biomedical ontologies and taxonomies and then manually translated by a professional medical translator. The direction of this sub-track is EN>ES.

The sample (dev) data includes 400 concepts. The terms are presented as tab-separated file (TSV), with the first column corresponding to English terms and the second column to Spanish terms. The third column includes the term’s origin ontology and its correspondent ID (separated by an underscore), while the fourth one includes a link to the concept in OBO Library.

The test data (1,789 concepts) is made up of a TSV file with five columns: term number, English term, Spanish term, ontology id and OBO library URL.

The background data (299,408 concepts) is made up of a TSV file with four columns: term number, English term, ontology id and OBO library URL.

The term number columns can be used to map the entries in the join test + background document provided in earlier versions.

Related Links:

• ClinSpEn website with more information: https://temu.bsc.es/clinspen/

• WMT website: https://www.statmt.org/wmt22/

License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Contact

If you have any question or suggestion, please contact us at the following addresses:

- Salvador Lima-López (