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 April 2020, the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak has affected, in some way, the living arrangements of around a third of healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom (UK). 12 percent of healthcare professionals still live in their home, but avoid contact with other members of their household, while three percent have had another member of the household live away from home due to coronavirus.

The latest number of cases in the UK can be found here. For further information about the coronavirus pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

In April 2020, a survey of healthcare workers in the United Kingdom (UK) found that majority are worried about their personal health as well as the health of those they live with during the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. 28 percent of healthcare workers reported to be very worried about their personal health, while 37 percent were very worried about the health of those in their household.

The latest number of cases in the UK can be found here. For further information about the coronavirus pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

As of May 2, 2023, the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) had been confirmed in almost every country in the world. The virus had infected over 687 million people worldwide, and the number of deaths had reached almost 6.87 million. The most severely affected countries include the U.S., India, and Brazil.

COVID-19: background information COVID-19 is a novel coronavirus that had not previously been identified in humans. The first case was detected in the Hubei province of China at the end of December 2019. The virus is highly transmissible and coughing and sneezing are the most common forms of transmission, which is similar to the outbreak of the SARS coronavirus that began in 2002 and was thought to have spread via cough and sneeze droplets expelled into the air by infected persons.

Naming the coronavirus disease Coronaviruses are a group of viruses that can be transmitted between animals and people, causing illnesses that may range from the common cold to more severe respiratory syndromes. In February 2020, the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses and the World Health Organization announced official names for both the virus and the disease it causes: SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, respectively. The name of the disease is derived from the words corona, virus, and disease, while the number 19 represents the year that it emerged.

This feature layer contains the most up-to-date COVID-19 cases and latest trend plot. It covers China, Canada, Australia (at province/state level), and the rest of the world (at country level, represented by either the country centroids or their capitals)and the US at county-level. Data sources: WHO, CDC, ECDC, NHC, DXY, 1point3acres, Worldometers.info, BNO, state and national government health departments, and local media reports. . The China data is automatically updating at least once per hour, and non-China data is updating hourly. This layer is created and maintained by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at the Johns Hopkins University. This feature layer is supported by Esri Living Atlas team and JHU Data Services. This layer is opened to the public and free to share. Contact us.

Age-standardised mortality rates for deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19), non-COVID-19 deaths and all deaths by vaccination status, broken down by age group.

Introduction: The first reported UK case of COVID-19 occurred on 30 January 2020. A lockdown from 24 March was partially relaxed on 10 May. One model to forecast disease spread depends on clinical parameters and transmission rates. Output includes the basic reproduction number R0 and the log growth rate r in the exponential phase.Methods: Office for National Statistics data on deaths in England and Wales is used to estimate r. A likelihood for the transmission parameters is defined from a gaussian density for r using the mean and standard error of the estimate. Parameter samples from the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm lead to an estimate and credible interval for R0 and forecasts for cases and deaths.Results: The UK initial log growth rate is r = 0.254 with s.e. 0.004. R0 = 6.94 with 95% CI (6.52, 7.39). In a 12 week lockdown from 24 March with transmission parameters reduced throughout to 5% of their previous values, peaks of around 90,000 severely and 25,000 critically ill patients, and 44,000 cumulative deaths are expected by 16 June. With transmission rising from 5% in mid-April to reach 30%, 50,000 deaths and 475,000 active cases are expected in mid-June. Had such a lockdown begun on 17 March, around 30,000 (28,000, 32,000) fewer cumulative deaths would be expected by 9 June.Discussion: The R0 estimate is compatible with some international estimates but over twice the value quoted by the UK government. An earlier lockdown could have saved many thousands of lives.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The Young Lives survey is an innovative long-term project investigating the changing nature of childhood poverty in four developing countries. The study is being conducted in Ethiopia, India, Peru and Vietnam and has tracked the lives of 12,000 children over a 20-year period, through 5 (in-person) survey rounds (Round 1-5) and, with the latest survey round (Round 6) conducted over the phone in 2020 and 2021 as part of the Listening to Young Lives at Work: COVID-19 Phone Survey.
Round 1 of Young Lives surveyed two groups of children in each country, at 1 year old and 5 years old. Round 2 returned to the same children who were then aged 5 and 12 years old. Round 3 surveyed the same children again at aged 7-8 years and 14-15 years, Round 4 surveyed them at 12 and 19 years old, and Round 5 surveyed them at 15 and 22 years old. Thus the younger children are being tracked from infancy to their mid-teens and the older children through into adulthood, when some will become parents themselves.

The 2020 phone survey consists of three phone calls (Call 1 administered in June-July 2020; Call 2 in August-October 2020 and Call 3 in November-December 2020) and the 2021 phone survey consists of two additional phone calls (Call 4 in August 2021 and Call 5 in October-December 2021) The calls took place with each Young Lives respondent, across both the younger and older cohort, and in all four study countries (reaching an estimated total of around 11,000 young people).
The Young Lives survey is carried out by teams of local researchers, supported by the Principal Investigator and Data Manager in each country.

Further information about the survey, including publications, can be downloaded from the Young Lives website.

The Listening to Young Lives at Work: COVID-19 Phone Survey, Fourth and Fifth Call, 2021 is an adapted version of the Round 6 survey with additional questions to directly assess the impact of COVID-19. The 2021 survey consists of two phone calls (Fourth Call and Fifth Call) with each of our Young Lives respondents, across both the younger and older cohorts, and in all four study countries (reaching an estimated total of around 11,000 young people). The Phone Survey will enable Young Lives to inform policy makers on the short-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Subsequently, and together with data collected in further survey rounds, Young Lives will be able to assess the medium and long term implications of the crisis. Further information is available on the Young Lives at Work webpage.

The Listening to Young Lives at Work: COVID-19 Phone Survey, First Call, Second Call and Third Call, 2020 is held at the UK Data Archive under SN 8678 and the Listening to Young Lives at Work: COVID-19 Phone Survey Calls 1-5 Constructed Files, 2020-2021 is held under SN 9070.

Main Topics:

The Listening to Young Lives at Work: COVID-19 Phone Survey, Fourth Call, 2021 data covers the following main topic areas:

• migration
• marital status
• information about the household (roster, demographics)
• pregnancies and information on children of the YL participants
• COVID-19 vaccinations and effects on health

The Listening to Young Lives at Work: COVID-19 Phone Survey, Fifth Call, 2021 data covers the following main topic areas:

• COVID-19: infections, behaviours, risk perceptions and vaccinations
• socio-economic status
• recent life history and economic shocks
• food security
• current education
• employment and earnings
• trust attitudes and family planning
• subjective wellbeing and mental health

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The UCL COVID-19 Social Study at University College London (UCL) was launched on 21 March 2020. Led by Dr Daisy Fancourt and Professor Andrew Steptoe from the Department of Behavioural Science and Health, the team designed the study to track in real-time the psychological and social impact of the virus across the UK.

The study quickly became the largest in the country, growing to over 70,000 participants and providing rare and privileged insight into the effects of the pandemic on people’s daily lives. Through our participants’ remarkable two-year commitment to the study, 1.2 million surveys were collected over 105 weeks, and over 100 scientific papers and 44 public reports were published.

During COVID-19, population mental health has been affected both by the intensity of the pandemic (cases and death rates), but also by lockdowns and restrictions themselves. Worsening mental health coincided with higher rates of COVID-19, tighter restrictions, and the weeks leading up to lockdowns. Mental health then generally improved during lockdowns and most people were able to adapt and manage their well-being. However, a significant proportion of the population suffered disproportionately to the rest, and stay-at-home orders harmed those who were already financially, socially, or medically vulnerable. Socioeconomic factors, including low SEP, low income, and low educational attainment, continued to be associated with worse experiences of the pandemic. Outcomes for these groups were worse throughout many measures including mental health and wellbeing; financial struggles;self-harm and suicide risk; risk of contracting COVID-19 and developing long Covid; and vaccine resistance and hesitancy. These inequalities existed before the pandemic and were further exacerbated by COVID-19, and such groups remain particularly vulnerable to the future effects of the pandemic and other national crises.

Further information, including reports and publications, can be found on the UCL COVID-19 Social Study website.

Main Topics:

The study asked baseline questions on the following:

• Demographics, including year of birth, sex, ethnicity, relationship status, country of dwelling, urban/rural dwelling, type of accommodation, housing tenure, number of adults and children in the household, household income, education, employment status, pet ownership, and personality.
• Health and health behaviours, including pre-existing physical health conditions, diagnosed mental health conditions, pregnancy, smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, caring responsibilities, usual social behaviours, and social network size.

It also asked repeated questions at every wave on the following:

• COVID-19 status, including whether the respondent had had COVID-19, whether they had come into likely contact with COVID-19, current isolation status and motivations for isolation, length of isolation, length of time not leaving the home, length of time not contacting others, trust in government, trust in the health service, adherence to health advice, and experience of adverse events due to COVID-19 (including severe illness within the family, bereavement, redundancy, or financial difficulties).
• Mental health, including wellbeing, depression, anxiety, which factors were causing stress, sleep quality, loneliness, social isolation, and changes in health behaviours such as smoking, drinking and exercise.
• How people were spending their time whilst in isolation, including questions on working, functional household activities, care, and schooling of any children in the household, hobbies, and relaxation.

Certain waves of the study also included one-off modules on topics including volunteering behaviours, locus of control, frustrations and expectations, coping styles, fear of COVID-19, resilience, arts and creative engagement, life events, weight, gambling behaviours, mental health diagnosis, use of financial support, faith and religion, relationships, neighbourhood satisfaction, healthcare usage, discrimination experiences, life changes, optimism, long COVID and COVID-19 vaccination.

In response to the outbreak of COVID-19, mandatory and voluntary self-isolation measures have been implemented by consumers around the world. Almost every aspect of consumers’ lives has been impacted as a result, including what they purchase, how and where they go shopping, and what they prepare and consume at mealtimes. Read More

As of May 2020, nearly 65 percent of survey respondents in Great Britain reported their freedom and independence had been affected by the coronavirus pandemic and subsequent lockdown. A further 58 percent said their personal travel plans had been affected due to the crisis, and 54 percent said it had also meant they were unable to make future plans. The latest number of cases in the UK can be found here. For further information about the coronavirus pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

As of May 2, 2023, the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) had spread to almost every country in the world, and more than 6.86 million people had died after contracting the respiratory virus. Over 1.16 million of these deaths occurred in the United States.

Waves of infections Almost every country and territory worldwide have been affected by the COVID-19 disease. At the end of 2021 the virus was once again circulating at very high rates, even in countries with relatively high vaccination rates such as the United States and Germany. As rates of new infections increased, some countries in Europe, like Germany and Austria, tightened restrictions once again, specifically targeting those who were not yet vaccinated. However, by spring 2022, rates of new infections had decreased in many countries and restrictions were once again lifted.

What are the symptoms of the virus? It can take up to 14 days for symptoms of the illness to start being noticed. The most commonly reported symptoms are a fever and a dry cough, leading to shortness of breath. The early symptoms are similar to other common viruses such as the common cold and flu. These illnesses spread more during cold months, but there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that temperature impacts the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Medical advice should be sought if you are experiencing any of these symptoms.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine had not reached its full potential in the US, with several barriers preventing its widespread uptake, including reimbursement and access issues, lack of awareness, resistance to change, preference for in-person care, and technical and connectivity issues. It is widely anticipated that COVID-19 may be the tipping point for telemedicine as the full potential of the technology is increasingly realized by patients, healthcare systems, and payers. As a result of the pandemic, regulations and policies governing reimbursement and use of telemedicine have changed significantly, leading to expanded access and an unprecedented demand for these services. The report assesses the use of live videoconferencing technologies, which allow the provision of on-demand, virtual, outpatient care during the COVID-19 pandemic as a result of social distancing and lockdown measures.- Read More

The Active Lives Survey (ALS) commenced in November 2015. It replaces the Active People Survey, which ran from 2005 to 2015. The survey provides the largest sample size ever established for a sport and recreation survey and allows levels of detailed analysis previously unavailable. It identifies how participation varies from place to place, across different sports, and between different groups in the population. The survey also measures levels of activity (active, fairly active and inactive), the proportion of the adult population that volunteer in sports on a weekly basis, club membership, sports spectating and wellbeing measures such as happiness and anxiety, etc. The questionnaire was designed to enable analysis of the findings by a broad range of demographic information, such as gender, social class, ethnicity, household structure, age, and disability.

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic developed rapidly during 2020 and 2021. Fieldwork for the Active Lives survey continued throughout the pandemic, which covered periods Nov 2019-20 and Nov 2020-21. The data from Nov 2021-22 onwards covers periods without any coronavirus restrictions.

More general information about the study can be found on the Sport England Active Lives Survey webpage and the Active Lives Online website, including reports and data tables.

Latest version

For the fourth edition (February 2025), the data file was resupplied, with an updated County Sports Partnership variable (CSP_2025), an updated inequalities metric variable (equalities_metric_2024_GR4), and new cultural activities variables (library visits, arts participation/visits, frequency) included.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The Active Lives Survey (ALS) commenced in November 2015. It replaces the Active People Survey, which ran from 2005 to 2015. The survey provides the largest sample size ever established for a sport and recreation survey and allows levels of detailed analysis previously unavailable. It identifies how participation varies from place to place, across different sports, and between different groups in the population. The survey also measures levels of activity (active, fairly active and inactive), the proportion of the adult population that volunteer in sports on a weekly basis, club membership, sports spectating and wellbeing measures such as happiness and anxiety, etc. The questionnaire was designed to enable analysis of the findings by a broad range of demographic information, such as gender, social class, ethnicity, household structure, age, and disability.

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic developed rapidly during 2020 and 2021. Fieldwork for the Active Lives survey continued throughout the pandemic, which covered periods Nov 2019-20 and Nov 2020-21. The data from Nov 2021-22 onwards covers periods without any coronavirus restrictions.

More general information about the study can be found on the Sport England Active Lives Survey webpage and the Active Lives Online website, including reports and data tables.

Active Lives Adults Survey, 2020-2021

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic developed rapidly during 2020 and 2021. Fieldwork for the Active Lives survey continued throughout the pandemic. This data, therefore, reflects the impact of coronavirus (COVID-19) on activity levels and the government’s policies to contain its spread. The survey instrument was largely unchanged. More general information about the study can be found on the Sport England Active People Survey and Active Lives Survey webpages and Active Lives Online website.

Latest edition information

For the second edition (February 2025), the data file was resupplied, with an updated County Sports Partnership variable (CSP_2025), an updated inequalities metric variable (equalities_metric_2024_GR4), and new cultural activities variables (library visits, arts participation/visits, frequency) included.

Main Topics:

Topics covered in the Active Lives Survey include:

• Sport and physical activity
• Health behaviour
• General health and wellbeing
• Sports volunteering
• Sport spectating
• Club membership

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. This study consists of transcripts of interviews conducted as part of the research project Identity, Inequality and the Media in Brexit-Covid-19-Britain. These transcripts report verbatim on in-depth interviews conducted with interviewees who live in the South West, East Midlands and North East of England. The interviews were designed to explore the ways in which participants perceived and experienced the social and political impacts of COVID-19 and Brexit. They explore the impact of both the pandemic and Brexit on individuals’ daily lives, their sense of belonging (or not) to place and nation, as well as the ways in which individuals engage with the media. Some of the interviews include a discussion of images that the participants felt captured the processes of Brexit and the pandemic. Furthermore, some of the interviews conducted in the South West focussed specifically on the project artist’s representation of the research themes. The study authors conducted 90 interviews for this research. Of these, 80 are included in the UKDS version due to confidentiality considerations.The interviews were conducted between October 2020 and July 2021. During this time England was experiencing national lockdowns and varying degrees of social distancing restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Main Topics: The topic guide was designed to explore with participants their experiences and views of the pandemic and Brexit, the impact of the pandemic and Brexit on their lives, the place where they lived, and the nation, as well as their daily media practices. We also explored with individuals their views and experiences of other significant social and political events that occurred during the national lockdowns, such as the global impact of the Black Lives Matter movement. Purposive selection/case studies Face-to-face interview: Computer-assisted (CAPI/CAMI)

COVID-19 causes significant mortality in elderly and vulnerable people and spreads easily in care homes where one in seven individuals aged > 85 years live. However, there is no surveillance for infection in care homes, nor are there systems (or research studies) monitoring the impact of the pandemic on individuals or systems. Usual practices are disrupted during the pandemic, and care home staff are taking on new and unfamiliar roles, such as advanced care planning. Understanding the nature of these changes is critical to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on residents, relatives and staff. 20 care homes staff members were interviewed using semi-structured interviews.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a substantial risk to elderly and vulnerable care home residents and COVID-19 can spread rapidly in care homes. We have national, daily data on people with COVID-19 and deaths, but there is no similar data for care homes. This makes it difficult to know the scale of the problem, and plan how to keep care home residents safe. We also want to understand the impact of COVID-19 on care home staff and residents. Researchers from University College London (UCL) will measure the number of cases of COVID-19 in care homes, using data from Four Seasons Healthcare, a large care home chain. FSHC remove residents' names and addresses before sending the dataset to UCL, protecting resident's confidentiality. Since we cannot visit care homes during the pandemic, we will hold virtual (online) discussion meetings with care home stakeholders (staff, residents, relatives, General Practice teams) every 6-8 weeks, to learn rapid lessons about managing COVID-19 in care homes and identify pragmatic solutions. Our findings will be shared with FHSC, GPs and Public Health England, patients and the public, and support the national response to COVID-19. Patients and the public will be involved in all stages of the research.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The Evidence for Equality National Survey (EVENS) is a national survey that documents the experiences and attitudes of ethnic and religious minorities in Britain. EVENS was developed by the Centre on the Dynamics of Ethnicity (CoDE) in response to the disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 and is the largest and most comprehensive survey of the lives of ethnic and religious minorities in Britain for more than 25 years. EVENS used pioneering, robust survey methods to collect data in 2021 from 14,200 participants of whom 9,700 identify as from an ethnic or religious minority. The EVENS main dataset, which is available from the UK Data Service under SN 9116, covers a large number of topics including racism and discrimination, education, employment, housing and community, health, ethnic and religious identity, and social and political participation.

The EVENS Teaching Dataset provides a selection of variables in an accessible form to support the use of EVENS in teaching across a range of subjects and levels of study. The dataset includes demographic data and variables to support the analysis of:

• racism and belonging
• health and well-being during COVID-19
• political attitudes and trust.

Main Topics:

Racism, belonging, impact of COVID-19, health, well-being, financial position, political attitudes and trust.