The data include COVID-19 case counts and test data such as positive cases (probable and laboratory confirmed) and recoveries, deaths in Kent County, Delaware from COVID-19, and current hospitalizations. Data is compiled by the Dept. of Health and Services and the local health department. Data may be downloaded as a CSV.

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.

As of May 19, 2021, over 249 thousand cases of the B.1.1.7 COVID-19 variant had been reported in the United Kingdom. That variant, also known as the UK variant or the Kent variant, came to prominence in late 2020 and appeared to be transmitting between people easier than the variant that started the pandemic. Even though viruses mutating is not unexpected, the worry for scientists and the global population overall is how effective the vaccines currently in use are against those new variants.

The total number of cases in the UK can be found here. For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

COVID-19 rate of death, or the known deaths divided by confirmed cases, was over ten percent in Yemen, the only country that has 1,000 or more cases. This according to a calculation that combines coronavirus stats on both deaths and registered cases for 221 different countries. Note that death rates are not the same as the chance of dying from an infection or the number of deaths based on an at-risk population. By April 26, 2022, the virus had infected over 510.2 million people worldwide, and led to a loss of 6.2 million. 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.

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. Note that Statista aims to also provide domestic source material for a more complete picture, and not to just look at one particular source. Examples are these statistics on the confirmed coronavirus cases in Russia or the COVID-19 cases in Italy, both of which are from domestic sources. For more information or other freely accessible content, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

A word on the flaws of numbers like this

People are right to ask whether these numbers are at all representative or not for several reasons. First, countries worldwide decide differently on who gets tested for the virus, meaning that comparing case numbers or death rates could to some extent be misleading. Germany, for example, started testing relatively early once the country’s first case was confirmed in Bavaria in January 2020, whereas Italy tests for the coronavirus postmortem. Second, not all people go to see (or can see, due to testing capacity) a doctor when they have mild symptoms. Countries like Norway and the Netherlands, for example, recommend people with non-severe symptoms to just stay at home. This means not all cases are known all the time, which could significantly alter the death rate as it is presented here. Third and finally, numbers like this change very frequently depending on how the pandemic spreads or the national healthcare capacity. It is therefore recommended to look at other (freely accessible) content that dives more into specifics, such as the coronavirus testing capacity in India or the number of hospital beds in the UK. Only with additional pieces of information can you get the full picture, something that this statistic in its current state simply cannot provide.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

Welfare at a (Social) Distance is a major research project looking at the UK benefits system during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council as part of UK Research and Innovation's rapid response to COVID-19. Further information can be found on the Welfare at a (Social) Distance project website.

The benefits system is crucial to supporting people during, and after, the COVID-19 crisis. With a growing number of new claimants, it faces two challenges. Firstly, to ensure people quickly get the money they need. Secondly, to make sure that people are helped to quickly return to work or supported further if unable to work.

This project provided vital information on how these challenges are being met and where the system struggles.

The project includes several components:

1. Three waves of YouGov quantitative surveys of new and existing benefit claimants (wave 1 n=8k, wave 2 and wave 3 with refreshment samples n=6.5-7.5k);
2. A quantitative survey of NON-claimants in July-Aug 2020 (n=2.8k), from a smaller related project funded by the Health Foundation - this includes those who tried and failed to claim, are in need but ineligible, or who may be eligible but decided not to claim.
3. Three waves of YouGov quantitative surveys of the general population about their attitudes to benefits (wave 1 n=1.6k, wave 2 and wave 3 n=3.4k);
4. Two waves of qualitative interviews (via phone/Zoom) with new and existing claimants (74 initial interviews and 60 follow-up interviews). These will be added to the UKDS study as soon as they are ready to release;
5. Qualitative interviews (via phone/Zoom) with organisations that provide support to benefit claimants, in four case study areas - Salford, Leeds, Newham (London), and Thanet (East Kent) (32 interviews). These will be added to the UKDS study as soon as they are ready to release.

Latest edition information

For the third edition (April 2023), data from the Wave 3 survey (May-June 2022) survey data have been added to the study. New versions of the previous datasets from Waves 1 and 2 (with the exception of the non-claimant survey, which is unchanged) have also been included. The user guide and questionnaire documents have been updated accordingly and documents relating to the qualitative research have been added.

A set of 165 qualitative interviews gathered at WP2 and WP3 were added to the study in May 2023.

Topics covered include:

• Benefits claims
• Mental health, disability and disability assessments
• Support in claiming benefits
• Benefits attitudes and stigma
• Income, financial strain and deprivation
• Employment

Further details of the main topics included are given in the main user guide.