The UK Government has been holding daily press briefings in order to provide updates on the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and outline any new measures being put in place to deal with the outbreak. Boris Johnson announced that the UK would be going into lockdown in a broadcast on March 23 which was watched live by more than half of the respondents to a daily survey. On June 28, just ** percent of respondents said they had not watched or read about the previous day's briefing. For further information about the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) Press Briefings Corpus is a work in progress to collect and present in a machine readable text dataset of the daily briefings from around the world by government authorities. During the peak of the pandemic, most countries around the world informed their citizens of the status of the pandemic (usually involving an update on the number of infection cases, number of deaths) and other policy-oriented decisions about dealing with the health crisis, such as advice about what to do to reduce the spread of the epidemic.Usually daily briefings did not occur on a Sunday.At the moment the dataset includes:

UK/England: Daily Press Briefings by UK Government between 12 March 2020 - 01 June 2020 (70 briefings in total)Scotland: Daily Press Briefings by Scottish Government between 3 March 2020 - 01 June 2020 (76 briefings in total)Wales: Daily Press Briefings by Welsh Government between 23 March 2020 - 01 June 2020 (56 briefings in total)Northern Ireland: Daily Press Briefings by N. Ireland Assembly between 23 March 2020 - 01 June 2020 (56 briefings in total)World Health Organisation: Press Briefings occuring usually every 2 days between 22 January 2020 - 01 June 2020 (63 briefings in total)

More countries will be added in due course, and we will be keeping this updated to cover the latest daily briefings available.The corpus is compiled to allow for further automated political discourse analysis (classification).

This briefing brings together a range of data published on the demographic impact of Covid19 to understand how the city has been affected, covering what is known about Covid-19 cases, before looking at mortality. It provides comparisons with other cities and explains some of the issues which affect the accuracy of such comparisons. And it summarises the emerging evidence of unequal impacts for different demographic groups, especially ethnicity and workers in particular occupations.

Coronavirus affects some members of the population more than others. Emerging evidence suggests that older people, men, people with health conditions such as respiratory and pulmonary conditions, and people of a Black, Asian Minority Ethnic (BAME) background are at particular risk. There are also a number of other wider public health risk factors that have been found to increase the likelihood of an individual contracting coronavirus. This briefing presents descriptive evidence on a range of these factors, seeking to understand at a London-wide level the proportion of the population affected by each.

This briefing presents evidence on the socio-economic impact of COVID-19 on London and Londoners​ Topics included in the briefing focus on recent data releases published in the preceding months that tell us how social policy issues are evolving in London since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic For more on the health and demographic impacts see the Demographic Impact Briefing and for labour market impacts see Labour Market Analysis. A page linking to all Covid-19 related data and analyses can be found here.

This mapping tool enables you to see how COVID-19 deaths in your area may relate to factors in the local population, which research has shown are associated with COVID-19 mortality. It maps COVID-19 deaths rates for small areas of London (known as MSOAs) and enables you to compare these to a number of other factors including the Index of Multiple Deprivation, the age and ethnicity of the local population, extent of pre-existing health conditions in the local population, and occupational data. Research has shown that the mortality risk from COVID-19 is higher for people of older age groups, for men, for people with pre-existing health conditions, and for people from BAME backgrounds. London boroughs had some of the highest mortality rates from COVID-19 based on data to April 17th 2020, based on data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Analysis from the ONS has also shown how mortality is also related to socio-economic issues such as occupations classified ‘at risk’ and area deprivation. There is much about COVID-19-related mortality that is still not fully understood, including the intersection between the different factors e.g. relationship between BAME groups and occupation. On their own, none of these individual factors correlate strongly with deaths for these small areas. This is most likely because the most relevant factors will vary from area to area. In some cases it may relate to the age of the population, in others it may relate to the prevalence of underlying health conditions, area deprivation or the proportion of the population working in ‘at risk occupations’, and in some cases a combination of these or none of them. Further descriptive analysis of the factors in this tool can be found here: https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/covid-19--socio-economic-risk-factors-briefing

The Covid-19 pandemic impacted both domestic and international migration patterns. This briefing is intended to provide a summary of pre-pandemic domestic migration relating to London, to provide a baseline against which new data can be compared. The Office for National Statistics provide annual data on internal migration moves into and out of each local authority in England and Wales, and for this report we used the data for the year ending mid 2020 that were released in June 2021.

The Covid in Cartoons project engaged 15-18 year olds with political cartoons and cartoonists to foster processes of meaning-making in relation to the pandemic. Working with Cartooning for Peace and ShoutOut UK we engaged young people in building critical narratives of the crisis and its impact on their lives. We aimed to promote an inclusive, socially-responsive curriculum that supports young people's ability to cope in difficult circumstances. We used surveys, focus groups, and records of the participants' experiences in the form of workbooks to gather data. The project was led by Dr Fransiska Louwagie (PI) and Dr Diane Levine (Co-I), with postdoctoral associates Dr Kara Blackmore and Dr Sarah Weidman, and ran between January 2021 and July 2022. The Covid in Cartoons team produced a briefing for policy makers in January 2022. We provided insights from our data relating to the recovery curriculum and priorities represented by the Departments for Education and Culture, Media, and Sport.

United Kingdom Leading Economic Index: MoM data was reported at -0.265 % in Feb 2025. This records a decrease from the previous number of 0.000 % for Jan 2025. United Kingdom Leading Economic Index: MoM data is updated monthly, averaging 0.138 % from Apr 1970 (Median) to Feb 2025, with 659 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2.459 % in Feb 1975 and a record low of -7.020 % in Apr 2020. United Kingdom Leading Economic Index: MoM data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by The Conference Board. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United Kingdom – Table UK.The Conference Board: Leading Economic Index. [COVID-19-IMPACT]

The data collection consists of 40 qualitative interviews with Polish migrant essential workers living in the UK and 10 in-depth expert interviews with key stakeholders providing information and support to migrant workers in the UK. All migrant interviews are in Polish. Six of the expert interviews with key stakeholders are in English and four are in Polish. Fieldwork was conducted fully online during the Covid-19 pandemic between March and August 2021, following the third UK-wide Covid-19 lockdown. Restrictions were still in place in some localities. Interviews took place shortly after the end of the transition period concluding the UK’s European Union exit on 1 January 2021. All Polish migrant worker interviewees entered the UK before 1 January 2021 and had the option to apply to the EU Settlement Scheme.

The objectives of the qualitative fieldwork were to: 1. To synthesise empirical and theoretical knowledge on the short- and long-term impacts of COVID-19 on migrant essential workers. 2. To establish how the pandemic affected Polish migrant essential worker's lives; and expert interviews with stakeholders in the public and third/voluntary sector to investigate how to best support and retain migrant essential workers in COVID-19 recovery strategies. The project also involved: - co-producing policy outputs with partner organisations in England and Scotland; and - an online survey to measure how Polish migrant essential workers across different roles and sectors were impacted by COVID-19 in regard to health, social, economic and cultural aspects, and intentions to stay in the UK/return to Poland (deposited separately to University of Sheffield). Key findings included significant new knowledge about the health, social, economic and cultural impacts of Covid-19 on migrant essential workers. Polish essential workers were severely impacted by the pandemic with major mental health impacts. Mental health support was insufficient throughout the UK. Those seeking support typically turned to private (online) services from Poland as they felt they could not access them in the UK because of language or cultural barriers, lack of understanding of the healthcare system and pathways to mental health support, support being offered during working hours only, or fear of the negative impact of using mental health services on work opportunities. Some participants were in extreme financial hardship, especially those with pre-settled status or those who arrived in the UK during the pandemic. The reasons for financial strain varied but there were strong patterns linked to increased pressure at work, greater exposure to Covid-19 as well as redundancies, pay cuts and rejected benefit applications. There was a tendency to avoid applying for state financial support. These impacts were compounded by the sense of isolation, helplessness, or long-distance grief due to inability to visit loved ones in Poland. Covid-19 impacted most detrimentally on women with caring responsibilities, single parents and people in the health and teaching sectors. The most vulnerable Polish migrant essential workers - e.g. those on lower income, with pre-existing health conditions, restricted access to support and limited English proficiency - were at most risk. Discrimination was reported, including not feeling treated equally in the workplace. The sense of discrimination two-fold: as essential workers (low-paid, low-status, unsafe jobs) and as Eastern Europeans (frequent disciplining practices, treated as threat, assumed to be less qualified). In terms of future plans, some essential workers intended to leave the UK or were unsure about their future place of residence. Brexit was a major reason for uncertain settlement plans. Vaccine hesitancy was identified, based on doubts about vaccination, especially amongst younger respondents who perceived low risks of Covid-19 for their own health, including women of childbearing age, who may have worries over unknown vaccine side-effects for fertility. Interview participants largely turned to Polish language sources for vaccination information, especially social media, and family and friends in Poland. This promoted the spread of misinformation as Poland has a strong anti-vaccination movement.

COVID-19 has exposed the UK's socio-economic dependence on a chronically insecure migrant essential workforce. While risking their lives to offset the devastating effects of the pandemic, migrant workers reportedly find themselves in precarious professional and personal circumstances (temporary zero-hours contracts, work exploitation, overcrowded accommodation, limited access to adequate health/social services including Universal Credit). This project will investigate the health, social, economic and cultural impacts of COVID-19 on the migrant essential workforce and how these might impact on their continued stay in the UK. It will focus on the largest non-British nationality in the UK, the Polish community, who - while employed across a range of roles and sectors - are overrepresented in lower-paid essential work. We will use this group as an illustrative case study to make wider claims and policy recommendations about migrant work during the pandemic. Using a mixed-methods approach, we will conduct: an online survey to map COVID-19 impacts; in-depth qualitative interviews to establish how the pandemic has affected worker's lives; and expert interviews with stakeholders to investigate how to best support and retain migrant essential workers in COVID-19 recovery strategies. The results will generate the first comprehensive UK-wide dataset on the experiences of migrant essential workers against the backdrop of COVID-19. The research, co-produced with partner organisations (Polish Expats Associations, Fife Migrants Forum, PKAVS Minority Communities Hub and Polish Social and Cultural Association), will generate a policy briefing, a toolkit for employers in the essential work sectors, information resources for migrant workers, alongside media and academic outputs.

Includes: Patient demographics, Source Organisation, vaccination details and vaccine batch events. Its scope covers: Anyone vaccinated within England Anyone vaccinated in a Devoted Administration where this information is subsequently passed to England.

Settings include: hospital hubs - NHS providers vaccinating on site local vaccine services – community or primary care led services which could include primary care facilities, retail, community facilities, temporary structures or roving teams vaccination centres – large sites such as sports and conference venues set up for high volumes of people

Timescales for dissemination can be found under 'Our Service Levels' at the following link: https://digital.nhs.uk/services/data-access-request-service-dars/data-access-request-service-dars-process

Includes: Patient demographics, Source Organisation, Adverse reaction details. Its scope covers: Anyone vaccinated within England and anyone vaccinated in a Devoted Administration where this information is subsequently passed to England.

Settings include hospital hubs - NHS providers vaccinating on site local vaccine services – community or primary care led services which could include primary care facilities, retail, community facilities, temporary structures or roving teams vaccination centres – large sites such as sports and conference venues set up for high volumes of people

Timescales for dissemination can be found under 'Our Service Levels' at the following link: https://digital.nhs.uk/services/data-access-request-service-dars/data-access-request-service-dars-process

United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index: Diffusion Index: 1 Month data was reported at 100.000 NA in Feb 2025. This records an increase from the previous number of 75.000 NA for Jan 2025. United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index: Diffusion Index: 1 Month data is updated monthly, averaging 62.500 NA from Feb 1970 (Median) to Feb 2025, with 661 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 100.000 NA in Feb 2025 and a record low of 0.000 NA in May 2022. United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index: Diffusion Index: 1 Month data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by The Conference Board. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United Kingdom – Table UK.The Conference Board: Leading Economic Index. [COVID-19-IMPACT]

Dissemination to stakeholders.

Higher Education Graduate Outcomes Statistics: UK, 2020/21 This Statistical Bulletin is the annual first release of Graduate Outcomes survey data. These experimental statistics cover UK higher education providers (HEPs) including alternative providers (APs) and further education colleges (FECs) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Data is collected approximately 15 months after HE course completion. The 2020/21 Graduate Outcomes cohort finished their qualifications in the second academic year affected by COVID-19. While Cohort A finished their qualifications during late summer and early autumn 2020, in a period of relatively loose restrictions, restrictions began to increase over the course of the academic year. Cohort B graduated into a period of short national lockdowns, followed by the start of the second national lockdown in January 2021. Cohort C likewise graduated in lockdown, but the progress of the vaccination programme led to a gradual easing of restrictions as spring progressed; by the time Cohort D, the largest Graduate Outcomes cohort, began to finish their qualifications in May 2021, most adults had been offered a first vaccine dose, and restrictions were gradually being phased out across the UK. The circumstances under which 2020/21 graduates were surveyed were quite different. As surveying for Cohort A opened in December 2021, Omicron variant cases were rising and new guidance was being issued requiring masks in indoor spaces and encouraging people to work from home where possible, the new restrictions were considerably more lenient than those which were introduced a year previously. By the time the Cohort B survey period opened in March 2022, all legal restrictions had been lifted in England, and remaining restrictions were phased out in other nations over the next few months. Although COVID cases rose from the start of June to a summer peak in early July, no legal restrictions were in place during the survey periods for Cohorts C and D. An insight briefing provides further detail on analysis undertaken to explore the impact of the pandemic, and the conclusions identified. This statistical bulletin has been produced by HESA in collaboration with statisticians from the Office for Students, the Department for Education, the Welsh Government, the Scottish Government and the Department for the Economy Northern Ireland. It has been released according to the arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority.

United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index: MoM data was reported at 0.279 % in Feb 2025. This records an increase from the previous number of 0.186 % for Jan 2025. United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index: MoM data is updated monthly, averaging 0.119 % from Mar 1970 (Median) to Feb 2025, with 660 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3.189 % in Mar 1972 and a record low of -3.322 % in May 1975. United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index: MoM data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by The Conference Board. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United Kingdom – Table UK.The Conference Board: Leading Economic Index. [COVID-19-IMPACT]

United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index data was reported at 107.800 2016=100 in Feb 2025. This records an increase from the previous number of 107.500 2016=100 for Jan 2025. United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index data is updated monthly, averaging 78.400 2016=100 from Feb 1970 (Median) to Feb 2025, with 661 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 107.800 2016=100 in Feb 2025 and a record low of 51.300 2016=100 in Feb 1970. United Kingdom Coincident Economic Index data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by The Conference Board. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United Kingdom – Table UK.The Conference Board: Leading Economic Index. [COVID-19-IMPACT]

IntroductionPublic health is not only threatened by diseases, pandemics, or epidemics. It is also challenged by deficits in the communication of health information. The current COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that impressively. One way to deliver scientific data such as epidemiological findings and forecasts on disease spread are dashboards. Considering the current relevance of dashboards for public risk and crisis communication, this systematic review examines the state of research on dashboards in the context of public health risks and diseases.MethodNine electronic databases where searched for peer-reviewed journal articles and conference proceedings. Included articles (n = 65) were screened and assessed by three independent reviewers. Through a methodological informed differentiation between descriptive studies and user studies, the review also assessed the quality of included user studies (n = 18) by use of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).Results65 articles were assessed in regards to the public health issues addressed by the respective dashboards, as well as the data sources, functions and information visualizations employed by the different dashboards. Furthermore, the literature review sheds light on public health challenges and objectives and analyzes the extent to which user needs play a role in the development and evaluation of a dashboard. Overall, the literature review shows that studies that do not only describe the construction of a specific dashboard, but also evaluate its content in terms of different risk communication models or constructs (e.g., risk perception or health literacy) are comparatively rare. Furthermore, while some of the studies evaluate usability and corresponding metrics from the perspective of potential users, many of the studies are limited to a purely functionalistic evaluation of the dashboard by the respective development teams.ConclusionThe results suggest that applied research on public health intervention tools like dashboards would gain in complexity through a theory-based integration of user-specific risk information needs.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=200178, identifier: CRD42020200178.