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.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
The number of deaths registered in England and Wales due to and involving coronavirus (COVID-19). Breakdowns include age, sex, region, local authority, Middle-layer Super Output Area (MSOA), indices of deprivation and place of death. Includes age-specific and age-standardised mortality rates.
On March 4, 2020, the first death as a result of coronavirus (COVID-19) was recorded in the United Kingdom (UK). The number of deaths in the UK has increased significantly since then. As of January 13, 2023, the number of confirmed deaths due to coronavirus in the UK amounted to 202,157. On January 21, 2021, 1,370 deaths were recorded, which was the highest total in single day in the UK since the outbreak began.
Number of deaths among highest in Europe
The UK has had the highest number of deaths from coronavirus in western Europe. In terms of rate of coronavirus deaths, the UK has recorded 297.8 deaths per 100,000 population.
Cases in the UK The number of confirmed cases of coronavirus in the UK was 24,243,393 as of January 13, 2023. The South East has the highest number of first-episode confirmed cases of the virus in the UK with 3,123,050 cases, while London and the North West have 2,912,859 and 2,580,090 confirmed cases respectively. As of January 16, the UK has had 50 new cases per 100,000 in the last seven days.
For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Provisional age-standardised mortality rates for deaths due to COVID-19 by sex, English regions and Welsh health boards.
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.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Provisional data on death registrations and death occurrences in England and Wales, broken down by sex and age. Includes deaths due to coronavirus (COVID-19) and leading causes of death.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Provisional counts of the number of deaths registered in England and Wales, including deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19), by local authority, health board and place of death in the latest weeks for which data are available. The occurrence tabs in the 2021 edition of this dataset were updated for the last time on 25 October 2022.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
The number of deaths, based on a 7-day rolling sum of deaths recorded where a diagnosis of Covid-19 within 28 days of the date of death has been recorded.Please note automatic updates to this dataset was discontinued on 3rd July 2023.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
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.
Men working in working-class jobs were at a higher risk of dying from Coronavirus in England and Wales, when compared their counterparts working in white-collar professions, as of April 2020. The death rate was highest for men working occupations classified as elementary trades at 27.8 per 100,000 population, compared with just 3.9 for those working in scientific research.
For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.
The dataset consists of quantitative data derived mainly from international datasets (ILO, WHO), supplemented by data from national datasets and modelled data to complete missing values. It shows the statistical data we collated and used to calculate estimates of Covid-19 deaths among migrant health care workers and includes details on how missing information was imputed. It includes spreadsheet estimates for India, Nigeria, Mexico, and the UK for excess and reported Covid-19 deaths amongst foreign-born workers and for all workers in the human health and social work sector and in three specific health occupations: doctors, nurses, and midwives. For each group the spreadsheets provide a basic estimate and an age-sex standardised estimate.
This project aims to give proper attention to the place of migrant workers in health care systems during the Covid-19 pandemic. Migrant workers are of substantial and growing significance in many countries' health and care systems and are key to realising the global goal of universal health care, so it is vital that we understand much better how Covid-19 is impacting on them.
The project's overarching research questions are, in the relation to Covid-19, what risks do migrant health care workers experience, what are the pressures on resilient and sustainable health care workforces, and how are stakeholders responding to these risks and pressures?
We develop a research method to estimate Covid-19 migrant health care worker mortality rates and trial the method, undertaking statistical analysis and modelling using quantitative data drawn from WHO and OECD data and other demographic and bio-statistical data as available.
In addition to strengthening the methodological techniques and empirical evidence base on the risks of Covid-19 infection and death among migrant health care workers our project also tracks, through documentary analysis, collective responses to such risks and challenges to sustainable health workforces for universal health coverage.
This project is attuned to the urgent need for high quality data and for 'real world' solutions-focused Covid-19 research forged from collaboration. We are focused on the immediate application of proof-of concept findings to a rapidly-evolving global health crisis.
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Pre-existing conditions of people who died due to COVID-19, broken down by country, broad age group, and place of death occurrence, usual residents of England and Wales.
https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/terms-and-conditionshttps://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/terms-and-conditions
This publication of the SHMI relates to discharges in the reporting period December 2022 - November 2023. The SHMI is the ratio between the actual number of patients who die following hospitalisation at the trust and the number that would be expected to die on the basis of average England figures, given the characteristics of the patients treated there. The SHMI covers patients admitted to hospitals in England who died either while in hospital or within 30 days of being discharged. Deaths related to COVID-19 are excluded from the SHMI. To help users of the data understand the SHMI, trusts have been categorised into bandings indicating whether a trust's SHMI is 'higher than expected', 'as expected' or 'lower than expected'. For any given number of expected deaths, a range of observed deaths is considered to be 'as expected'. If the observed number of deaths falls outside of this range, the trust in question is considered to have a higher or lower SHMI than expected. The expected number of deaths is a statistical construct and is not a count of patients. The difference between the number of observed deaths and the number of expected deaths cannot be interpreted as the number of avoidable deaths or excess deaths for the trust. The SHMI is not a measure of quality of care. A higher than expected number of deaths should not immediately be interpreted as indicating poor performance and instead should be viewed as a 'smoke alarm' which requires further investigation. Similarly, an 'as expected' or 'lower than expected' SHMI should not immediately be interpreted as indicating satisfactory or good performance. Trusts may be located at multiple sites and may be responsible for 1 or more hospitals. A breakdown of the data by site of treatment is also provided, as well as a breakdown of the data by diagnosis group. Further background information and supporting documents, including information on how to interpret the SHMI, are available on the SHMI homepage (see Related Links). Information about the exclusion of COVID-19 from the SHMI can also be found on the same page. A link to the methodological changes statement which details the exclusion is also available in the Related Links section
Open Government Licence 3.0http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis looking at clusters of deaths involving COVID-19 across time and areas in England and Wales.
Official statistics are produced impartially and free from political influence.
https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/terms-and-conditionshttps://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/terms-and-conditions
Notes:
Official statistics are produced impartially and free from political influence.
http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/open-government-licencehttp://reference.data.gov.uk/id/open-government-licence
Estimates of the risk of hospital admission for coronavirus (COVID-19) and death involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, overall and by age group, using anonymised linked data from Census 2021. Experimental Statistics.
Outcome definitions
For this analysis, we define a death as involving COVID-19 if either of the ICD-10 codes U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) or U07.2 (COVID-19, virus not identified) is mentioned on the death certificate. Information on cause of death coding is available in the User Guide to Mortality Statistics. We use date of occurrance rather than date of registration to give the date of the death.
We define COVID-109 hospitalisation as an inpatient episode in Hospital Episode Statistics where the primary diagnosis was COVID-19, identified by the ICD-19 codes (COVID-19, virus identified) or U07.2 (COVID-19, virus not identified). Where an individual had experienced more than one COVID-19 hospitalisation, the earliest that occurred within the study period was used. We define the date of COVID-19 hospitalisation as the start of the hospital episode.
ICD-10 code
U07.1 :
COVID-19, virus identified
U07.2:
COVID-19, virus not identified
Vaccination status is defined by the dose and the time since the last dose received
Unvaccinated:
no vaccination to less than 21 days post first dose
First dose 21 days to 3 months:
more than or equal to 21 days post second dose to earliest of less than 91 days post first dose or less than 21 days post second dose
First dose 3+ months:
more than or equal to 91 days post first dose to less than 21 days post second dose
Second dose 21 days to 3 months:
more than or equal to 21 days post second dose to earliest of less than 91 days post second dose or less than 21 days post third dose
Second dose 3-6 months:
more than or equal to 91 days post second dose to earliest of less than 182 days post second dose or less than 21 days post third dose
Second dose 6+ months:
more than or equal to 182 days post second dose to less than 21 days post third dose
Third dose 21 days to 3 months:
more than or equal to 21 days post third dose to less than 91 days post third dose
Third dose 3+ months:
more than or equal to 91 days post third dose
Model adjustments
Three sets of model adjustments were used
Age adjusted:
age (as a natural spline)
Age, socio-demographics adjusted:
age (as a natural spline), plus socio-demographic characteristics (sex, region, ethnicity, religion, IMD decile, NSSEC category, highest qualification, English language proficiency, key worker status)
Fully adjusted:
age (as a natural spline), plus socio-demographic characteristics (sex, region, ethnicity, religion, IMD decile, NSSEC category, highest qualification, English language proficiency, key worker status), plus health-related characteristics (disability, self-reported health, care home residency, number of QCovid comorbidities (grouped), BMI category, frailty flag and hospitalisation within the last 21 days.
Age
Age in years is defined on the Census day 2021 (21 March 2021). Age is included in the model as a natural spline with boundary knots at the 10th and 90th centiles and internal knots at the 25th, 50th and 75th centiles. The positions of the knots are calculated separately for the overall model and for each age group for the stratified model.
https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/terms-and-conditionshttps://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/terms-and-conditions
Notes:
For the week ending March 7, 2025, weekly deaths in England and Wales were 124 below the number expected, compared with 460 fewer than expected in the previous week. In late 2022, and through early 2023, excess deaths were elevated for a number of weeks, with the excess deaths figure for the week ending January 13, 2023, the highest since February 2021. In the middle of April 2020, at the height of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, there were almost 12,000 excess deaths a week recorded in England and Wales. It was not until two months later, in the week ending June 19, 2020, that the number of deaths began to be lower than the five-year average for the corresponding week. Most deaths since 1918 in 2020 In 2020, there were 689,629 deaths in the United Kingdom, making that year the deadliest since 1918, at the height of the Spanish influenza pandemic. As seen in the excess death figures, April 2020 was by far the worst month in terms of deaths during the pandemic. The weekly number of deaths for weeks 16 and 17 of that year were 22,351, and 21,997 respectively. Although the number of deaths fell to more usual levels for the rest of that year, a winter wave of the disease led to a high number of deaths in January 2021, with 18,676 deaths recorded in the fourth week of that year. For the whole of 2021, there were 667,479 deaths in the UK, 22,150 fewer than in 2020. Life expectancy in the UK goes into reverse In 2022, life expectancy at birth for women in the UK was 82.6 years, while for men it was 78.6 years. This was the lowest life expectancy in the country for ten years, and came after life expectancy improvements stalled throughout the 2010s, and then declined from 2020 onwards. There is also quite a significant regional difference in life expectancy in the UK. In the London borough of Kensington and Chelsea, for example, the life expectancy for men was 81.5 years, and 86.5 years for women. By contrast, in Blackpool, in North West England, male life expectancy was just 73.1 years, while for women life expectancy was lowest in Glasgow, at 78 years.
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.