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

This archive contains the ESRC funded data collection (UK data) only.

The data collection contains a state file consisting of 902 variables, 677 observations. The codebook available in the data collection provides detailed descriptions of variables and data codes (missing etc). For more information please contact stephani.hatch@kcl.ac.uk

Research from the United Kingdom and the United States shows wide health inequalities by race/ethnicity and socio-economic status. So far we do not clearly understand the roles that discrimination and social context play in creating these inequalities.

Research teams at King's College London (UK) and Columbia University (USA) will carry out studies to investigate:

the roles that the historical social context and policy play in shaping observed patterns of health inequalities;

differences in anticipated and perceived experiences of discrimination;

how discrimination contributes to inequalities in everyday social functioning, mental health, physical health, and use of health services.

Comparisons will be made with 1600 adults from two larger studies, (i) the UK National Institute for Health Research-funded South East London Community Health study at the Biomedical Research Centre for Mental Health, and (ii) the US National Institute of Health-funded Child Health and Development Disparities Study in the East Bay Area of California. UK and US researchers, health practitioners, and community members will be invited to participate in developing the social and historical contextual narratives and in planning the dissemination of our research findings.

Addressing ethnic inequalities in health requires accurate and complete information to support monitoring and health improvement. This publication relates to the quality and completeness of information on ethnicity in hospital discharge and new outpatient appointment data. Source agency: ISD Scotland (part of NHS National Services Scotland) Designation: Official Statistics not designated as National Statistics Language: English Alternative title: Equality and diversity monitoring

Unequal impact of COVID-19: BAME disproportionality This slide pack covers the latest PHE and ONS data, national and local, showing diagnosis and death rates by deprivation, underlying conditions and ethnicity (note: these analyses did not account for the effect of occupation, co-morbidities or obesity).

Unequal impact of COVID-19: BAME disproportionality Camden Demographics of Shielded Population by location age ethnicity deprivation gender GPs and reason for shielding.

To establish whether ethnic inequalities exist in levels of self-reported hearing difficulty and hearing aid use among middle-aged adults. Cross-sectional data from the UK Biobank resource. 164,460 participants aged 40–69 who answered hearing questions at an assessment centre in England or Wales. After taking into account objectively assessed hearing performance and a corresponding correction for bias in non-native English speakers, as well as a range of correlates including demographic, socioeconomic, and health factors, there were lower levels of hearing aid use for people from Black African (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17–0.77), Black Caribbean (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.22–0.65) and Indian (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41–0.86) ethnic groups, compared to the White British or Irish group. Men from most ethnic minority groups and women from Black African, Black Caribbean and Indian groups were less likely to report hearing difficulty than their White British or Irish counterparts. For equivalent levels of hearing loss, the use of hearing aids is lower among ethnic minority groups. Inequalities are partly due to lower levels of self-reported hearing difficulty among minority groups. However, even when self-reported hearing difficulty is considered, hearing aid use remains lower among many ethnic minority groups.

Agreement rates between ethnicity data recorded in health-related administrative data sources with Census 2021 by sociodemographic characteristics, where population was restricted to those with data for all socio-demographic characteristics.

Comparing the quality of ethnicity data recorded in health-related administrative data sources with Census 2021.

This is a monthly report on publicly funded community services for people of all ages using data from the Community Services Data Set (CSDS) reported in England for September 2021. It has been developed to help achieve better outcomes and provide data that will be used to commission services in a way that improves health, reduces inequalities, and supports service improvement and clinical quality. This report uses the new version of the dataset, CSDS v1.5. As an uplift from v1.0, the v1.5 dataset collects additional data on a person's care plan details, employment status and social & personal circumstances. These statistics are classified as experimental and should be used with caution. Experimental statistics are new official statistics undergoing evaluation. More information about experimental statistics can be found on the UK Statistics Authority website. A supplementary file including health visiting metrics now accompanies this publication. Due to the coronavirus illness (COVID-19) disruption, the quality and coverage of some of our statistics has been affected, for example, by an increase in non-submissions for some datasets. We are also seeing some different patterns in the submitted data. For example, fewer patients are being referred to hospital and more appointments being carried out via phone/telemedicine/email. Therefore, data should be interpreted with care over the COVID-19 period.

BackgroundElectronic health records (EHRs) are increasingly used to investigate health inequalities across ethnic groups. While there are some studies showing that the recording of ethnicity in EHR is imperfect, there is no robust evidence on the accuracy between the ethnicity information recorded in various real-world sources and census data.Methods and findingsWe linked primary and secondary care NHS England data sources with Census 2021 data and compared individual-level agreement of ethnicity recording in General Practice Extraction Service (GPES) Data for Pandemic Planning and Research (GDPPR), Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Ethnic Category Information Asset (ECIA), and Talking Therapies for anxiety and depression (TT) with ethnicity reported in the census. Census ethnicity is self-reported and, therefore, regarded as the most reliable population-level source of ethnicity recording. We further assessed the impact of multiple approaches to assigning a person an ethnic category. The number of people that could be linked to census from ECIA, GDPPR, HES, and TT were 47.4m, 43.5m, 47.8m, and 6.3m, respectively. Across all 4 data sources, the White British category had the highest level of agreement with census (≥96%), followed by the Bangladeshi category (≥93%). Levels of agreement for Pakistani, Indian, and Chinese categories were ≥87%, ≥83%, and ≥80% across all sources. Agreement was lower for Mixed (≤75%) and Other (≤71%) categories across all data sources. The categories with the lowest agreement were Gypsy or Irish Traveller (≤6%), Other Black (≤19%), and Any Other Ethnic Group (≤25%) categories.ConclusionsCertain ethnic categories across all data sources have high discordance with census ethnic categories. These differences may lead to biased estimates of differences in health outcomes between ethnic groups, a critical data point used when making health policy and planning decisions.

BackgroundWomen from ethnic minority groups are at greater risk of developing mental health problems. Poor perinatal mental health impacts on maternal morbidity and mortality and can have a devastating impact on child and family wellbeing. It is important to ensure that services are designed to meet the unique needs of women from diverse backgrounds.AimThe aim of the review was to explore ethnic minority women's experiences of perinatal mental ill health, help-seeking and perinatal mental health services in Europe.Data sourcesSearches included CINAHL, Maternity and Infant Care, MEDLINE and PsycINFO with no language or date restrictions. Additional literature was identified by searching reference lists of relevant studies.DesignThis was a mixed method systematic review. Study selection, appraisal and data extraction were conducted by two researchers independently. A convergent approach was adopted for the analysis and the data were synthesised thematically.ResultsThe 15 eligible studies included women from a range of minority ethnic backgrounds and were all undertaken in the United Kingdom (UK). Seven overarching themes were identified; awareness and beliefs about mental health, isolation and seeking support, influence of culture, symptoms and coping strategies, accessing mental health services, experiences of mental health services and what women want.ConclusionLack of awareness about mental ill health, cultural expectations, ongoing stigma, culturally insensitive and fragmented health services and interactions with culturally incompetent and dismissive health providers all impact on ethnic minority women's ability to receive adequate perinatal mental health support in the UK. Future research should focus on in-depth exploration of the experiences of these women across multiple European settings and interventions to reduce health inequalities among vulnerable mothers and families affected by perinatal mental ill health.

HABS-HD investigates the course and outcome of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in diverse ethnic groups. Participants are African Americans, Mexican Americans, and non-Hispanic Whites aged 50 years and older living in and around the Dallas/Fort Worth area in Texas. Participants are divided into three substudies based on ethnic group: the Health and Aging Brain: Health Disparities, the Health and Aging Brain: Health Disparities Among Blacks and the Health and Aging Brain: Health Disparities Among Hispanics. Over 4,000 participants have completed the baseline data collection as of 2024, and the study continues to recruit. Participants are followed up every 24 to 30 months to monitor their health and cognitive status.

Unequal impact of COVID-19: BAME disproportionality With the whole country and world waking up to the deeply entrenched structural equalities that have impacted the lives of our Black, Asian and other ethnic Minority communities, there is a collective appreciation that we need to go further to dismantle a system, and create new ones. Local and national evidence shows that people from a Black, Asian or minority ethnic background are disproportionately impacted by Covid-19. In response to this, the council implemented this working group to carry out a rapid 6-week programme to gather evidence of the impacts of Covid-19 and develop actions for supporting our residents during this time and beyond. Intensive work has been underway to understand and take action to address the direct and indirect health impacts of Covid-19 on our Black, Asian and other Ethnic Minority communities in Camden, and to ensure that individuals and communities are protected both now and through the next phase of the pandemic, but also to bring about wider systemic change. This document is us working in the open with you and shows the information that was provided by different service areas to the member-led working group for comment and to develop actions going forward. The Black, Asian and other Ethnic Minority Inequalities and Covid-19 Working Group has benefitted from evidence and the lived experience of our residents, VCS partners, professionals and Members in guiding and shaping the Council’s response from bureaucratic to relational. In this document you will find summaries of the data included in these presentation slides and the relevant links to documents.

Comparing the quality of ethnicity data recorded in individual Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) sub-datasets, including Admitted Patient Care (APC), Outpatients (OP), and Accident and Emergency (A&E) and Emergency Care Dataset (ECDS), with Census 2021.

Vaccination rates and odds ratios by socio-demographic group among people living in England.

This dataset illustrates uptake inequalities of fourth doses of the coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine using 2021 Census-derived demographic and socio-economic characteristics: age. sex, ethnicity, religion, socio-economic status and self-reported disability and health status.

Vaccination data are produced using linked data from Deaths registrations and Census 2021, National Immunisation Management Service, Hospital Episode Statistics and General Practise Extraction Service data for Pandemic Planning and Research.

Data may differ from weekly administrative vaccination data published by NHS England.

Comparisons showing differences in the recording of ethnicity data between three health administrative data sources (GDPPR, ECIA, HES) and the 2011 Census.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The overarching aim of the Early Life Cohort Feasibility Study (ELC-FS) was to explore the feasibility of a new birth cohort study in the UK that would paint a nationally representative picture of the circumstances and lives of a new cohort of babies born at a critical time in the UK's history, and to understand how inequalities in early child development are changing over time.

ELC-FS was based on a sample of babies born in England, Wales and Scotland in November-December 2022 and in Northern Ireland in June-July 2023. In England, Wales and Scotland, samples were drawn from birth registration data that was matched with maternity records; samples were provided by NHS England, National Records Scotland and Public Health Scotland. In Northern Ireland, samples were drawn from maternity records only, provided by the Business Services Organisation on behalf of Health Trusts. The sampling design comprised over-sampling at national level in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and in England, a boost of Black Caribbean, Black African, Pakistani and Bangladeshi babies and a boost of families living in low-income areas.

Interviews were mainly conducted in-person, with telephone, Teams, and web options, with up to two parents in up to two households for each birth. Main fieldwork was conducted September 2023-February 2024 in England and Wales, late November 2023-April 2024 in Scotland, and April-July 2024 in Northern Ireland. Once the main fieldwork stage was complete, those who had not participated were invited to complete a shorter version of the questionnaire via web (online follow-up survey).

The study recruited 1,933 families in the UK: 1,015 families in England, 279 families in Wales, 319 families in Scotland and 320 families in Northern Ireland. The study aimed to recruit families during their babies' first year of life; most babies were between 9-12 months.

A Secure Access version of the data are available under SN 9450, containing detailed sensitive variables not available under Safeguarded access. Further information is available in section 5.14 of the User Guide.