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.
U.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
License information was derived automatically
A listing of each accidental death associated with drug overdose in Connecticut from 2012 to June 2017. A "Y" value under the different substance columns indicates that particular substance was detected.
Data are derived from an investigation by the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner which includes the toxicity report, death certificate, as well as a scene investigation.
The “Morphine (Not Heroin)” values are related to the differences between how Morphine and Heroin are metabolized and therefor detected in the toxicity results. Heroin metabolizes to 6-MAM which then metabolizes to morphine. 6-MAM is unique to heroin, and has a short half-life (as does heroin itself). Thus, in some heroin deaths, the toxicity results will not indicate whether the morphine is from heroin or prescription morphine. In these cases the Medical Examiner may be able to determine the cause based on the scene investigation (such as finding heroin needles). If they find prescription morphine at the scene it is certified as “Morphine (not heroin).” Therefor, the Cause of Death may indicate Morphine, but the Heroin or Morphine (Not Heroin) may not be indicated.
“Any Opioid” – If the Medical Examiner cannot conclude whether it’s RX Morphine or heroin based morphine in the toxicity results, that column may be checked
Notice of data discontinuation: Since the start of the pandemic, AP has reported case and death counts from data provided by Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University has announced that they will stop their daily data collection efforts after March 10. As Johns Hopkins stops providing data, the AP will also stop collecting daily numbers for COVID cases and deaths. The HHS and CDC now collect and visualize key metrics for the pandemic. AP advises using those resources when reporting on the pandemic going forward.
April 9, 2020
April 20, 2020
April 29, 2020
September 1st, 2020
February 12, 2021
new_deaths
column.February 16, 2021
The AP is using data collected by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering as our source for outbreak caseloads and death counts for the United States and globally.
The Hopkins data is available at the county level in the United States. The AP has paired this data with population figures and county rural/urban designations, and has calculated caseload and death rates per 100,000 people. Be aware that caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.
This data is from the Hopkins dashboard that is updated regularly throughout the day. Like all organizations dealing with data, Hopkins is constantly refining and cleaning up their feed, so there may be brief moments where data does not appear correctly. At this link, you’ll find the Hopkins daily data reports, and a clean version of their feed.
The AP is updating this dataset hourly at 45 minutes past the hour.
To learn more about AP's data journalism capabilities for publishers, corporations and financial institutions, go here or email kromano@ap.org.
Use AP's queries to filter the data or to join to other datasets we've made available to help cover the coronavirus pandemic
Filter cases by state here
Rank states by their status as current hotspots. Calculates the 7-day rolling average of new cases per capita in each state: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=481e82a4-1b2f-41c2-9ea1-d91aa4b3b1ac
Find recent hotspots within your state by running a query to calculate the 7-day rolling average of new cases by capita in each county: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=b566f1db-3231-40fe-8099-311909b7b687&showTemplatePreview=true
Join county-level case data to an earlier dataset released by AP on local hospital capacity here. To find out more about the hospital capacity dataset, see the full details.
Pull the 100 counties with the highest per-capita confirmed cases here
Rank all the counties by the highest per-capita rate of new cases in the past 7 days here. Be aware that because this ranks per-capita caseloads, very small counties may rise to the very top, so take into account raw caseload figures as well.
The AP has designed an interactive map to track COVID-19 cases reported by Johns Hopkins.
@(https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/15/)
<iframe title="USA counties (2018) choropleth map Mapping COVID-19 cases by county" aria-describedby="" id="datawrapper-chart-nRyaf" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/10/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" height="400"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">(function() {'use strict';window.addEventListener('message', function(event) {if (typeof event.data['datawrapper-height'] !== 'undefined') {for (var chartId in event.data['datawrapper-height']) {var iframe = document.getElementById('datawrapper-chart-' + chartId) || document.querySelector("iframe[src*='" + chartId + "']");if (!iframe) {continue;}iframe.style.height = event.data['datawrapper-height'][chartId] + 'px';}}});})();</script>
Johns Hopkins timeseries data - Johns Hopkins pulls data regularly to update their dashboard. Once a day, around 8pm EDT, Johns Hopkins adds the counts for all areas they cover to the timeseries file. These counts are snapshots of the latest cumulative counts provided by the source on that day. This can lead to inconsistencies if a source updates their historical data for accuracy, either increasing or decreasing the latest cumulative count. - Johns Hopkins periodically edits their historical timeseries data for accuracy. They provide a file documenting all errors in their timeseries files that they have identified and fixed here
This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 tracking project
The number of deaths of children under the age of five. The data is sorted by both sex and total and includes a range of values from 1955 to 2019. A birth-week cohort method is used to calculate the absolute number of deaths among neonates, infants, and children under age 5. First, each annual birth cohort is divided into 52 equal birth-week cohorts. Then each birth-week cohort is exposed throughout the first five years of life to the appropriate calendar year- and age-specific mortality rates depending on cohort age. All deaths from birth-week cohorts occurring as a result of exposure to the mortality rate for a given calendar year are allocated to that year and are summed by age group at death to get the total number of deaths for a given year and age group. The annual estimate of the number of live births in each country comes from the World Population Prospects. This data is sourced from the UN Inter-Agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation. The UN IGME uses the same estimation method across all countries to arrive at a smooth trend curve of age-specific mortality rates. The estimates are based on high quality nationally representative data including statistics from civil registration systems, results from household surveys, and censuses. The child mortality estimates are produced in conjunction with national level agencies such as a country’s Ministry of Health, National Statistics Office, or other relevant agencies.
Series Name: Neonatal mortality rate (deaths per 1 000 live births)Series Code: SH_DYN_NMRTRelease Version: 2020.Q2.G.03This dataset is the part of the Global SDG Indicator Database compiled through the UN System in preparation for the Secretary-General's annual report on Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals.Indicator 3.2.2: Neonatal mortality rateTarget 3.2: By 2030, end preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of age, with all countries aiming to reduce neonatal mortality to at least as low as 12 per 1,000 live births and under-5 mortality to at least as low as 25 per 1,000 live birthsGoal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all agesFor more information on the compilation methodology of this dataset, see https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/
As of January 13, 2023, Bulgaria had the highest rate of COVID-19 deaths among its population in Europe at 548.6 deaths per 100,000 population. Hungary had recorded 496.4 deaths from COVID-19 per 100,000. Furthermore, Russia had the highest number of confirmed COVID-19 deaths in Europe, at over 394 thousand.
Number of cases in Europe During the same period, across the whole of Europe, there have been over 270 million confirmed cases of COVID-19. France has been Europe's worst affected country with around 38.3 million cases, this translates to an incidence rate of approximately 58,945 cases per 100,000 population. Germany and Italy had approximately 37.6 million and 25.3 million cases respectively.
Current situation In March 2023, the rate of cases in Austria over the last seven days was 224 per 100,000 which was the highest in Europe. Luxembourg and Slovenia both followed with seven day rates of infections at 122 and 108 respectively.
https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data/blob/master/LICENSEhttps://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data/blob/master/LICENSE
The New York Times is releasing a series of data files with cumulative counts of coronavirus cases in the United States, at the state and county level, over time. We are compiling this time series data from state and local governments and health departments in an attempt to provide a complete record of the ongoing outbreak.
Since the first reported coronavirus case in Washington State on Jan. 21, 2020, The Times has tracked cases of coronavirus in real time as they were identified after testing. Because of the widespread shortage of testing, however, the data is necessarily limited in the picture it presents of the outbreak.
We have used this data to power our maps and reporting tracking the outbreak, and it is now being made available to the public in response to requests from researchers, scientists and government officials who would like access to the data to better understand the outbreak.
The data begins with the first reported coronavirus case in Washington State on Jan. 21, 2020. We will publish regular updates to the data in this repository.
MIT Licensehttps://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
License information was derived automatically
Zip Code, Life expectancy; Cancer deaths per 100,000 people; Heart disease deaths per 100,000 people; Alzheimer’s disease deaths per 100,000 people; Stroke deaths per 100,000 people; Chronic lower respiratory disease deaths per 100,000 people; Unintentional injury deaths per 100,000 people; Diabetes deaths per 100,000 people; Influenza and pneumonia deaths per 100,000 people; Hypertension deaths per 100,000 people. Percentages unless otherwise noted. Source information provided at: https://www.sccgov.org/sites/phd/hi/hd/Documents/City%20Profiles/Methodology/Neighborhood%20profile%20methodology_082914%20final%20for%20web.pdf
As of March 10, 2023, the death rate from COVID-19 in the state of New York was 397 per 100,000 people. New York is one of the states with the highest number of COVID-19 cases.
This layer shows the location of the Births and Deaths Registries in Hong Kong. It is a subset of the geo-referenced public facility data made available by the Lands Department under the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (the “Government”) at https://DATA.GOV.HK/ (“DATA.GOV.HK”). The source data is in CSV format and processed and converted to Esri File Geodatabase format and then uploaded to Esri’s ArcGIS Online platform for sharing and reference purpose. The objectives are to facilitate our Hong Kong ArcGIS Online users to use the data in a spatial ready format and save their data conversion effort. For details about the data, source format and terms of conditions of usage, please refer to the website of DATA.GOV.HK (https://data.gov.hk).
This map shows the age-standardized mortality rate attributed to air pollution by countries. The rate is shown as deaths per 100,000 people. The global average is 95 deaths per 100,000 people. Any areas in the map above this rate are shown in red. 2016 figures for pollution-caused mortality rate are offered by the World Health Organization (WHO). Values are offered as a mean, upper value, lower value, and also offered as age standardized. Values are for deaths caused by all possible air pollution related diseases, for both sexes, and all age groups. For more information visit this page, and here for methodology. According to WHO, the world average was 95 deaths per 100,000 people.PM 2.5 is fine particulate matter that is 2.5 microns or less in diameter. These particles can cause the air to be hazy, and can get into human lungs and the bloodstream causing major health concerns. To learn more about PM 2.5 and its global/human impacts, visit this World Health Organization page about ambient air pollution.The PM 2.5 data in this map is aggregated from NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) gridded data into country boundaries, administrative 1 boundaries, and 50 km hex bins. The unit of measurement for PM 2.5 concentrations is micrograms per cubic meter. For full metadata and methodology documentation about the layer used in this map, visit this Living Atlas layer. For metadata and methodology about the data used to generate the layer, visit the NASA SEDAC gridded PM 2.5 documentation page.To learn the techniques used in the analysis that generated this layer, visit the Learn ArcGIS lesson Investigate Pollution Patterns with Space-Time Analysis by Esri's Kevin Bulter and Lynne Buie. Citations:van Donkelaar, A., R. V. Martin, M. Brauer, N. C. Hsu, R. A. Kahn, R. C. Levy, A. Lyapustin, A. M. Sayer, and D. M. Winker. 2018. Global Annual PM2.5 Grids from MODIS, MISR and SeaWiFS Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) with GWR, 1998-2016. Palisades, NY: NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC). https://doi.org/10.7927/H4ZK5DQS. Accessed 1 April 2020van Donkelaar, A., R. V. Martin, M. Brauer, N. C. Hsu, R. A. Kahn, R. C. Levy, A. Lyapustin, A. M. Sayer, and D. M. Winker. 2016. Global Estimates of Fine Particulate Matter Using a Combined Geophysical-Statistical Method with Information from Satellites. Environmental Science & Technology 50 (7): 3762-3772. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b05833.
Series Name: Maternal mortality ratioSeries Code: SH_STA_MMRRelease Version: 2020.Q2.G.03This dataset is the part of the Global SDG Indicator Database compiled through the UN System in preparation for the Secretary-General's annual report on Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals.Indicator 3.1.1: Maternal mortality ratioTarget 3.1: By 2030, reduce the global maternal mortality ratio to less than 70 per 100,000 live birthsGoal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all agesFor more information on the compilation methodology of this dataset, see https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/
MMWR Surveillance Summary 66 (No. SS-1):1-8 found that nonmetropolitan areas have significant numbers of potentially excess deaths from the five leading causes of death. These figures accompany this report by presenting information on potentially excess deaths in nonmetropolitan and metropolitan areas at the state level. They also add additional years of data and options for selecting different age ranges and benchmarks. Potentially excess deaths are defined in MMWR Surveillance Summary 66(No. SS-1):1-8 as deaths that exceed the numbers that would be expected if the death rates of states with the lowest rates (benchmarks) occurred across all states. They are calculated by subtracting expected deaths for specific benchmarks from observed deaths. Not all potentially excess deaths can be prevented; some areas might have characteristics that predispose them to higher rates of death. However, many potentially excess deaths might represent deaths that could be prevented through improved public health programs that support healthier behaviors and neighborhoods or better access to health care services. Mortality data for U.S. residents come from the National Vital Statistics System. Estimates based on fewer than 10 observed deaths are not shown and shaded yellow on the map. Underlying cause of death is based on the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) Heart disease (I00-I09, I11, I13, and I20–I51) Cancer (C00–C97) Unintentional injury (V01–X59 and Y85–Y86) Chronic lower respiratory disease (J40–J47) Stroke (I60–I69) Locality (nonmetropolitan vs. metropolitan) is based on the Office of Management and Budget’s 2013 county-based classification scheme. Benchmarks are based on the three states with the lowest age and cause-specific mortality rates. Potentially excess deaths for each state are calculated by subtracting deaths at the benchmark rates (expected deaths) from observed deaths. Users can explore three benchmarks: “2010 Fixed” is a fixed benchmark based on the best performing States in 2010. “2005 Fixed” is a fixed benchmark based on the best performing States in 2005. “Floating” is based on the best performing States in each year so change from year to year. SOURCES CDC/NCHS, National Vital Statistics System, mortality data (see http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/deaths.htm); and CDC WONDER (see http://wonder.cdc.gov). REFERENCES Moy E, Garcia MC, Bastian B, Rossen LM, Ingram DD, Faul M, Massetti GM, Thomas CC, Hong Y, Yoon PW, Iademarco MF. Leading Causes of Death in Nonmetropolitan and Metropolitan Areas – United States, 1999-2014. MMWR Surveillance Summary 2017; 66(No. SS-1):1-8. Garcia MC, Faul M, Massetti G, Thomas CC, Hong Y, Bauer UE, Iademarco MF. Reducing Potentially Excess Deaths from the Five Leading Causes of Death in the Rural United States. MMWR Surveillance Summary 2017; 66(No. SS-2):1–7.
Suicide deaths and rates by age group in Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington counties from 2003 - 2017.Data compiled from the https://geo.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=9c59be59ef7142dfad40d95e3b36f588.Counts for 2015-2017 are not comparable to other date ranges because the time periods are not equal.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Annual data on death registrations by area of usual residence in the UK. Summary tables including age-standardised mortality rates.
Maternal mortality ratio is defined as the number of female deaths due to obstetric causes (ICD-10 codes: A34, O00-O95, O98-O99) while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy. The maternal mortality ratio indicates the likelihood of a pregnant person dying of obstetric causes. It is calculated by dividing the number of deaths among birthing people attributable to obstetric causes in a calendar year by the number of live births registered for the same period and is presented as a rate per 100,000 live births. The number of live births used in the denominator approximates the population of pregnant and birthing people who are at risk. Data are not presented for geographies with number of maternal deaths less than 11.Compared to other high-income countries, women in the US are more likely to die from childbirth or problems related to pregnancy. In addition, there are persistent disparities by race and ethnicity, with Black pregnant persons experiencing a much higher rate of maternal mortality compared to White pregnant persons. Improving the quality of medical care for pregnant individuals before, during, and after pregnancy can help reduce maternal deaths.For more information about the Community Health Profiles Data Initiative, please see the initiative homepage.
Registered charity 1126727; registered company limited by guarantee 6611408 (England and Wales)
The National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS) provides states and communities with a clearer understanding of violent deaths to guide local decisions about efforts to prevent violence and helps them track progress over time.
To stop violent deaths, we must first understand all the facts. Created in 2002, the NVDRS is a surveillance system that pulls together data on violent deaths in 18 states (see map below), including information about homicides, such as homicides perpetrated by a intimate partner (e.g., boyfriend, girlfriend, wife, husband), child maltreatment (or child abuse) fatalities, suicides, deaths where individuals are killed by law enforcement in the line of duty, unintentional firearm injury deaths, and deaths of undetermined intent.
These data are supported by WISQARS, an interactive query system that provides data on injury deaths, violent deaths, and nonfatal injuries.
U.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
License information was derived automatically
Rate of deaths by age/gender (per 100,000 population) for people killed in crashes involving a driver with BAC =>0.08%, 2012. 2012 Source: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS)Note: Blank cells indicate data are suppressed. 2014 Source: Source: National Highway Traffic Administration's (NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2014 Annual Report File. Fatality rates based on fewer than 20 deaths are suppressed.
U.S. Government Workshttps://www.usa.gov/government-works
License information was derived automatically
Rate of deaths by age/gender (per 100,000 population) for motor vehicle occupants killed in crashes, 2012 & 2014. 2012 Source: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). 2014 Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), 2014 Annual Report File Note: Blank cells indicate data are suppressed. Fatality rates based on fewer than 20 deaths are suppressed.
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.