The National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS), conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), collects annual data on visits to emergency departments to describe patterns of utilization and provision of ambulatory care delivery in the United States. Data are collected from nonfederal, general, and short-stay hospitals from all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, and are used to develop nationally representative estimates. The data include counts and rates of emergency department visits from 2016-2022 for the 10 leading primary diagnoses and reasons for visit, stratified by selected patient and hospital characteristics. Rankings for the 10 leading categories were identified using weighted data from 2022 and were then assessed in prior years.

Context

This dataset contains Hospital General Information from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. This is the BigQuery COVID-19 public dataset. This data contains a list of all hospitals that have been registered with Medicare. This list includes addresses, phone numbers, hospital types and quality of care information. The quality of care data is provided for over 4,000 Medicare-certified hospitals, including over 130 Veterans Administration (VA) medical centers, across the country. You can use this data to find hospitals and compare the quality of their care

Querying BigQuery tables

You can use the BigQuery Python client library to query tables in this dataset in Kernels. Note that methods available in Kernels are limited to querying data. Tables are at bigquery-public-data.cms_medicare.hospital_general_info.

Sample Query

How do the hospitals in Mountain View, CA compare to the average hospital in the US? With the hospital compare data you can quickly understand how hospitals in one geographic location compare to another location. In this example query we compare Google’s home in Mountain View, California, to the average hospital in the United States. You can also modify the query to learn how the hospitals in your city compare to the US national average.

“#standardSQL SELECT MTV_AVG_HOSPITAL_RATING, US_AVG_HOSPITAL_RATING FROM ( SELECT ROUND(AVG(CAST(hospital_overall_rating AS int64)),2) AS MTV_AVG_HOSPITAL_RATING FROM bigquery-public-data.cms_medicare.hospital_general_info WHERE city = 'MOUNTAIN VIEW' AND state = 'CA' AND hospital_overall_rating <> 'Not Available') MTV JOIN ( SELECT ROUND(AVG(CAST(hospital_overall_rating AS int64)),2) AS US_AVG_HOSPITAL_RATING FROM bigquery-public-data.cms_medicare.hospital_general_info WHERE hospital_overall_rating <> 'Not Available') ON 1 = 1”

What are the most common diseases treated at hospitals that do well in the category of patient readmissions? For hospitals that achieved “Above the national average” in the category of patient readmissions, it might be interesting to review the types of diagnoses that are treated at those inpatient facilities. While this query won’t provide the granular detail that went into the readmission calculation, it gives us a quick glimpse into the top disease related groups (DRG)
, or classification of inpatient stays that are found at those hospitals. By joining the general hospital information to the inpatient charge data, also provided by CMS, you could quickly identify DRGs that may warrant additional research. You can also modify the query to review the top diagnosis related groups for hospital metrics you might be interested in. “#standardSQL SELECT drg_definition, SUM(total_discharges) total_discharge_per_drg FROM bigquery-public-data.cms_medicare.hospital_general_info gi INNER JOIN bigquery-public-data.cms_medicare.inpatient_charges_2015 ic ON gi.provider_id = ic.provider_id WHERE readmission_national_comparison = 'Above the national average' GROUP BY drg_definition ORDER BY total_discharge_per_drg DESC LIMIT 10;”

Success.ai’s Healthcare Industry Leads Data for the North American Healthcare Sector provides businesses with a comprehensive dataset designed to connect with healthcare organizations, decision-makers, and key stakeholders across the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Covering hospitals, pharmaceutical firms, biotechnology companies, and medical equipment providers, this dataset delivers verified contact information, firmographic details, and actionable business insights.

With access to over 170 million verified professional profiles and 30 million company profiles, Success.ai ensures your outreach, market research, and strategic initiatives are powered by accurate, continuously updated, and AI-validated data. Backed by our Best Price Guarantee, this solution is your key to success in the North American healthcare market.

Why Choose Success.ai’s Healthcare Industry Leads Data?

1. Verified Contact Data for Precision Targeting

   • Access verified work emails, phone numbers, and LinkedIn profiles of healthcare executives, clinical managers, procurement officers, and compliance leaders.
   • AI-driven validation ensures 99% accuracy, reducing bounce rates and improving engagement efficiency.

2. Comprehensive Coverage of North America’s Healthcare Sector

   • Includes profiles of organizations such as hospitals, private clinics, research facilities, biotech firms, and medical supply distributors.
   • Gain visibility into the unique healthcare dynamics of the United States, Canada, and Mexico, including regional trends, regulatory differences, and market opportunities.

3. Continuously Updated Datasets

   • Real-time updates reflect changes in leadership, organizational structures, service offerings, and market activities.
   • Ensure your outreach and strategy stay relevant and aligned with the rapidly evolving healthcare industry.

4. Ethical and Compliant

   • Adheres to GDPR, CCPA, and other global privacy regulations, ensuring responsible and compliant use of data for your campaigns.

Data Highlights:

• 170M+ Verified Professional Profiles: Engage with decision-makers and influencers across North America’s healthcare sector.
• 30M Company Profiles: Access detailed firmographic data, including organization sizes, revenue ranges, and geographic footprints.
• Decision-Maker Contacts: Connect with CEOs, CMOs, clinical directors, R&D leaders, and procurement managers shaping healthcare strategies.
• Operational Insights: Understand supply chains, service lines, and product pipelines within the healthcare ecosystem.

Key Features of the Dataset:

1. Healthcare Decision-Maker Profiles

   • Identify and connect with healthcare leaders driving innovation, procurement decisions, and patient care delivery.
   • Engage with professionals responsible for technology adoption, regulatory compliance, and resource management.

2. Advanced Filters for Precision Targeting

   • Filter companies by sector (hospitals, biotech, pharma, medical devices), geographic location, revenue size, or workforce composition.
   • Tailor your outreach to align with the unique needs and priorities of North American healthcare organizations.

3. Market and Operational Insights

   • Analyze trends such as telemedicine adoption, value-based care initiatives, and investments in AI and automation.
   • Leverage these insights to position your solutions effectively within a rapidly transforming industry.

4. AI-Driven Enrichment

   • Profiles enriched with actionable data allow for personalized messaging, highlight your value propositions, and improve engagement outcomes with healthcare stakeholders.

Strategic Use Cases:

1. Sales and Lead Generation

   • Offer technology solutions, medical devices, or consulting services to healthcare organizations seeking operational improvements.
   • Build relationships with procurement managers, clinical directors, and decision-makers responsible for resource allocation.

2. Marketing and Demand Generation

   • Target marketing teams and outreach coordinators within healthcare organizations to promote software solutions, diagnostic tools, or patient engagement platforms.
   • Leverage verified contact data to launch impactful email and multi-channel marketing campaigns.

3. Regulatory Compliance and Risk Mitigation

   • Connect with compliance officers and legal teams responsible for adhering to healthcare regulations and standards.
   • Present solutions for streamlined reporting, risk management, and quality assurance processes.

4. Recruitment and Workforce Optimization

   • Engage HR professionals and hiring managers in recruiting healthcare talent, from clinical staff to administrative roles.
   • Provide staffing solutions, training platforms, or workforce management tools tailored to healthcare environments.

Why Choose Success.ai?

1. Best Price Guarantee
   • Access premium-q...

Graph and download economic data for Total Revenue for Hospitals, All Establishments (REV622ALLEST144QSA) from Q4 2004 to Q2 2025 about hospitals, revenue, establishments, and USA.

Introduction

EHR Industry Statistics: Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are digital versions of patient paper charts, revolutionizing healthcare by providing instant, secure access to comprehensive medical information.

They include details like medical history, diagnoses, medications, and test results, consolidating data from various sources into one accessible record.

EHRs enhance patient care by supporting better coordination among healthcare providers, improving efficiency through reduced paperwork, and enabling patient engagement via access to their records.

Challenges include high implementation costs, interoperability issues between different systems, and concerns about data privacy.

Looking ahead, advancements aim to improve interoperability, enhance data analytics, and integrate with telemedicine for more efficient and personalized healthcare delivery.

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Kids' Inpatient Database (KID) is the largest publicly available all-payer pediatric inpatient care database in the United States, containing data from two to three million hospital stays each year. Its large sample size is ideal for developing national and regional estimates and enables analyses of rare conditions, such as congenital anomalies, as well as uncommon treatments, such as organ transplantation. Developed through a Federal-State-Industry partnership sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HCUP data inform decision making at the national, State, and community levels. The KID is a sample of pediatric discharges from 4,000 U.S. hospitals in the HCUP State Inpatient Databases yielding approximately two to three million unweighted hospital discharges for newborns, children, and adolescents per year. About 10 percent of normal newborns and 80 percent of other neonatal and pediatric stays are selected from each hospital that is sampled for patients younger than 21 years of age. The KID contains clinical and resource use information included in a typical discharge abstract, with safeguards to protect the privacy of individual patients, physicians, and hospitals (as required by data sources). It includes discharge status, diagnoses, procedures, patient demographics (e.g., sex, age), expected source of primary payment (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, self-pay, and other insurance types), and hospital charges and cost. Restricted access data files are available with a data use agreement and brief online security training.

Context

Every year, all U.S. hospitals that accept payments from Medicare and Medicaid must submit quality data to The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). CMS' Hospital Compare program is a consumer-oriented website that provides information on "the quality of care hospitals are providing to their patients." CMS releases this quality data publicly in order to encourage hospitals to improve their quality and to help consumer make better decisions about which providers they visit.

"Hospital Compare provides data on over 4,000 Medicare-certified hospitals, including acute care hospitals, critical access hospitals (CAHs), children’s hospitals, Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Medical Centers, and hospital outpatient departments"

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) uses a five-star quality rating system to measure the experiences Medicare beneficiaries have with their health plan and health care system — the Star Rating Program. Health plans are rated on a scale of 1 to 5 stars, with 5 being the highest.

Content

• Includes the most recent Hospital General Information.csv data for each archive year found on CMS' archive site. Years: 2016-2020

| Column Name | Data Type | Description | | --- | --- | -- | | Facility ID | Char(6) | Facility Medicare ID | | Facility Name | Char(72) | Name of the facility | | Address | Char(51) | Facility street address | | City | Char(20) | Facility City | | State | Char(2) | Facility State | | ZIP Code | Num(8) | Facility ZIP Code | | County Name | Char(25) | Facility County | | Phone Number | Char(14) | Facility Phone Number | | Hospital Type | Char(34) | What type of facility is it? | | Hospital Ownership | Char(43) | What type of ownership does the facility have? | | Emergency Services | Char(3)) | Does the facility have emergency services Yes/No? | | Meets criteria for promoting interoperability of EHRs | Char(1) | Does facility meet government EHR standard Yes/No? | | Hospital overall rating | Char(13) | Hospital Overall Star Rating 1=Worst; 5=Best. Aggregate measure of all other measures | | Hospital overall rating footnote | Num(8) | | | Mortality national comparison | Char(28) | Facility overall performance on mortality measures compared to other facilities | | Mortality national comparison footnote | Num(8) | | | Safety of care national comparison | Char(28) | Facility overall performance on safety measures compared to other facilities | | Safety of care national comparison footnote | Num(8) | | | Readmission national comparison | Char(28) | Facility overall performance on readmission measures compared to other facilities | | Readmission national comparison footnote | Num(8) | | | Patient experience national comparison | Char(28) | Facility overall performance on pat. exp. measures compared to other facilities | | Patient experience national comparison footnote | Char(8) | | | Effectiveness of care national comparison | Char(28) | Facility overall performance on effect. of care measures compared to other facilities | | Effectiveness of care national comparison footnote | Char(8) | | | Timeliness of care national comparison | Char(28) | Facility overall performance on timeliness of care measures compared to other facilities | | Timeliness of care national comparison footnote| Char(8) | | | Efficient use of medical imaging national comparison | Char(28) | Facility overall performance on efficient use measures compared to other facilities | | Efficient use of medical imaging national comparison footnote | Char(8) | | | Year | Char(4) | cms data release year |

Acknowledgements

A similar dataset called Hospital General Information was previously uploaded to Kaggle. However, that dataset only includes data from one year (2017). I was inspired by this dataset to go a little further and try to add a time dimension. This dataset includes a union of Hospital General Information for the years 2016-2020. The python script used to collect and union all the datasets can be found on my [github[(https://github.com/abrambeyer/cms_hospital_general_info_file_downloader). Thanks to this dataset owner for the inspiration.

Thanks to CMS for releasing this dataset publicly to help consumers find better hospitals and make better-informed decisions.

***All Hospital Compare websites are publically accessible. As works of the U.S. government, Hospital Compare data are in the public domain and permission is not required to reuse them. An attribution to the agency as the source is appreciated. Your ...

Success.ai’s Healthcare Industry Leads Data and B2B Contact Data for US Healthcare Professionals offers an extensive and verified database tailored to connect businesses with key executives and administrators in the healthcare industry across the United States. With over 170M verified profiles, including work emails and direct phone numbers, this dataset enables precise targeting of decision-makers in hospitals, clinics, and healthcare organizations.

Backed by AI-driven validation technology for unmatched accuracy and reliability, this contact data empowers your marketing, sales, and recruitment strategies. Designed for industry professionals, our continuously updated profiles provide the actionable insights you need to grow your business in the competitive healthcare sector.

Key Features of Success.ai’s US Healthcare Contact Data:

• Comprehensive Healthcare Sector Coverage Access detailed contact information for professionals across the healthcare spectrum:

Hospital Executives: CEOs, CFOs, and COOs managing top-tier facilities. Healthcare Administrators: Decision-makers driving operational excellence. Medical Professionals: Physicians, specialists, and nurse practitioners. Clinic Managers: Leaders in small and mid-sized healthcare organizations.

• AI-Validated Accuracy and Updates

  99% Verified Accuracy: Our advanced AI technology ensures data reliability for optimal engagement. Real-Time Updates: Profiles are continuously refreshed to maintain relevance and accuracy. Minimized Bounce Rates: Save time and resources by reaching verified contacts.

• Customizable Delivery Options Choose how you access the data to match your business requirements:

API Integration: Connect our data directly to your CRM or sales platform. Flat File Delivery: Receive customized datasets in formats suited to your needs.

Why Choose Success.ai for Healthcare Data?

• Best Price Guarantee We ensure competitive pricing for our verified contact data, offering the most comprehensive and cost-effective solution in the market.

• Compliance-Driven and Ethical Data Our data collection adheres to strict global standards, including HIPAA, GDPR, and CCPA compliance, ensuring secure and ethical usage.

• Strategic Benefits for Your Business Success.ai’s US healthcare professional data unlocks numerous business opportunities:

Targeted Marketing: Develop tailored campaigns aimed at healthcare executives and decision-makers. Efficient Sales Outreach: Engage with key contacts to accelerate your sales process. Recruitment Optimization: Access verified profiles to identify and recruit top talent in the healthcare industry. Market Intelligence: Use detailed firmographic and demographic insights to guide strategic decisions. Partnership Development: Build valuable relationships within the healthcare ecosystem.

• Data Highlights 170M+ Verified Profiles 50M Direct Phone Numbers 700M Global Professional Profiles 70M Verified Company Profiles

Key APIs for Advanced Functionality

• Enrichment API Enhance your existing contact data with real-time updates, ensuring accuracy and relevance for your outreach initiatives.

• Lead Generation API Drive high-quality lead generation efforts by utilizing verified contact information, including work emails and direct phone numbers, for up to 860,000 API calls per day.

• Use Cases

1. Healthcare Marketing Campaigns Target verified executives and administrators to deliver personalized and impactful marketing campaigns.

2. Sales Enablement Connect with key decision-makers in healthcare organizations, ensuring higher conversion rates and shorter sales cycles.

3. Talent Acquisition Source and engage healthcare professionals and administrators with accurate, up-to-date contact information.

4. Strategic Partnerships Foster collaborations with healthcare institutions and professionals to expand your business network.

5. Industry Analysis Leverage enriched contact data to gain insights into the US healthcare market, helping you refine your strategies.

• What Sets Success.ai Apart?

Verified Accuracy: AI-driven technology ensures 99% reliability for all contact details. Comprehensive Reach: Covering healthcare professionals from large hospital systems to smaller clinics nationwide. Flexible Access: Customizable data delivery methods tailored to your business needs. Ethical Standards: Fully compliant with healthcare and data protection regulations.

Success.ai’s B2B Contact Data for US Healthcare Professionals is the ultimate solution for connecting with industry leaders, driving impactful marketing campaigns, and optimizing your recruitment strategies. Our commitment to quality, accuracy, and affordability ensures you achieve exceptional results while adhering to ethical and legal standards.

No one beats us on price. Period.

The point shapefile shows locations of the critical care hospitals in the lower 48 states compiled from Health Resource and Service Administration (HRSA) of Dept. of HHS, dataset. There are over 8000 records that have name, address, telephone numbers (where listed) and also number of certified and toal hospital beds available at these hospitals.

The Veterans Health Administration Medical Facilities dataset includes Veteran Affairs hospitals, Veteran Affairs Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Programs (RRTP), Veteran Affairs Nursing Home Care Units (NHCU), Veteran Affairs Outpatient Clinics (VAOC), Vet Centers, and Veteran Affairs Medical Centers (VAMC). It should not include planned and suspended (non-operational) sites and mobile clinics. These definitions were set by the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Policy Board in December 1998 and are the basis for defining the category and the additional service types for each VHA service site. These definitions cover sites generally owned by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with the exception of leased and contracted community-based outpatient clinics (CBOCs). 1. VA HOSPITAL: an institution (health care site) that is owned, staffed and operated by VA and whose primary function is to provide inpatient services. NOTE: Each geographically unique inpatient division of an integrated facility is counted as a separate hospital. 2. VA RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION TREATMENT PROGRAM (RRTP): provides comprehensive health and social services in a VA facility for eligible veterans who are ambulatory and do not require the level of care provided in nursing homes. 3. VA NURSING HOME CARE UNITS (NHCU): provides care to individuals who are not in need of hospital care, but who require nursing care and related medical or psychosocial services in an institutional setting. VA NHCUs are facilities designed to care for patients who require a comprehensive care management system coordinated by an interdisciplinary team. Services provided include nursing, medical, rehabilitative, recreational, dietetic, psychosocial, pharmaceutical, radiological, laboratory, dental and spiritual. 4. VA OUTPATIENT CLINICS: a. Community-Based Outpatient Clinic (CBOC): a VA-operated, VA-funded, or VA-reimbursed health care facility or site geographically distinct or separate from a parent medical facility. This term encompasses all types of VA outpatient clinics, except hospital-based, independent and mobile clinics. Satellite, community-based, and outreach clinics have been redefined as CBOCs. Technically, CBOCs fall into four Categories, which are: > (i) VA-owned. A CBOC that is owned and staffed by VA. > (ii) Leased. A CBOC where the space is leased (contracted), but is staffed by VA. NOTE: This includes donated space staffed by VA. > (iii) Contracted. A CBOC where the space and the staff are not VA. This is typically a Healthcare Management Organization (HMO)-type provided where multiple sites can be associated with a single station identifier. > (iv) Not Operational. A CBOC which has been approved by Congress, but has not yet begun operating. b. Hospital-Based Outpatient Clinic: outpatient clinic functions located at a hospital. c. Independent Outpatient Clinic: a full-time, self-contained, freestanding, ambulatory care clinic that has no management, program, or fiscal relationship to a VA medical facility. Primary and specialty health care services are provided in an outpatient setting. 5. VET CENTER: Provides professional readjustment counseling, community education, outreach to special populations, brokering of services with community agencies, and access to links between the veteran and VA. 6. VA MEDICAL CENTER (VAMC): a medical center is a unique VA site of care providing two or more types of services that reside at a single physical site location. The services provided are the primary service as tracked in the VHA Site Tracking (VAST) (i.e., VA Hospital, Nursing Home, Domiciliary, independent outpatient clinic (IOC), hospital-based outpatient clinic (HBOC), and CBOC). The definition of VA medical center does not include the Vet Centers as an identifying service. This dataset is based upon GFI data received from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). At the request of NGA, text fields in this dataset have been set to all upper case to facilitate consistent database engine search results. At the request of NGA, all diacritics (e.g., the German umlaut or the Spanish tilde) have been replaced with their closest equivalent English character to facilitate use with database systems that may not support diacritics. The currentness of this dataset is indicated by the [CONTDATE] attribute. Based upon this attribute, the oldest record dates from 09/21/2007 and the newest record dates from 10/15/2007.

Medicare Spending per Beneficiary

Detailed Hospital Expense Breakdown

By Health [source]

About this dataset

This file allows healthcare executives and analysts to make informed decisions regarding how well continued improvements are being made over time so that they can understand how efficient they are fulfilling treatments while staying within budgetary constraints. Additionally, it’ll also help them map out trends amongst different hospitals and spot anomalies that could indicate areas where decisions should be reassessed as needed

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset can provide valuable insights into how Medicare is spending per patient at specific hospitals in the United States. It can be used to gain a better understanding of the types of services covered under Medicare, and to what extent those services are being used. By comparing the average Medicare spending across different hospitals, users can also gain insight into potential disparities in care delivery or availability.

To use this dataset, first identify which hospital you are interested in analyzing. Then locate the row for that hospital in the dataset and review its associated values: value, footnote (optional), and start/end dates (optional). The Value column refers to how much Medicare spends on each particular patient; this is a numerical value represented as a decimal number up to 6 decimal places. The Footnote (optional) provides more information about any special circumstances that may need attention when interpreting the value data points. Finally, if Start Date and End Date fields are present they will specify over what timeframe these values were aggregated over.

Once all relevant data elements have been reviewed successively for all hospitals of interest then comparison analysis among them can be conducted based on Value, Footnote or Start/End dates as necessary to answer specific research questions or formulate conclusions about how Medicare is spending per patient at various hospitals nationwide

Research Ideas

• Developing a cost comparison tool for hospitals that allows patients to compare how much Medicare spends per patient across different hospitals.
• Creating an algorithm to help predict Medicare spending at different facilities over time and build strategies on how best to manage those costs.
• Identifying areas in which a hospital can save money by reducing unnecessary spending in order to reduce overall Medicare expenses

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

License: Dataset copyright by authors - You are free to: - Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially. - Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. - You must: - Give appropriate credit - Provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. - ShareAlike - You must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. - Keep intact - all notices that refer to this license, including copyright notices.

Columns

File: Medicare_hospital_spending_per_patient_Medicare_Spending_per_Beneficiary_Additional_Decimal_Places.csv | Column name | Description | |:---------------|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Value | The amount of Medicare spending per patient for a given hospital or region. (Numeric) | | Footnote | Any additional notes or information related to the value. (Text) | | Start_Date | The start date of the period for which the value applies. (Date) | | End_Date | The end date of the period for which the value applies. (Date) |

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. If you use this dataset in your research, please credit Health.

This dataset represents preliminary estimates of cumulative U.S. COVID-19 disease burden for the 2024-2025 period, including illnesses, outpatient visits, hospitalizations, and deaths. The weekly COVID-19-associated burden estimates are preliminary and based on continuously collected surveillance data from patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. The data come from the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET), a surveillance platform that captures data from hospitals that serve about 10% of the U.S. population. Each week CDC estimates a range (i.e., lower estimate and an upper estimate) of COVID-19 -associated burden that have occurred since October 1, 2024.

Note: Data are preliminary and subject to change as more data become available. Rates for recent COVID-19-associated hospital admissions are subject to reporting delays; as new data are received each week, previous rates are updated accordingly.

References

1. Reed C, Chaves SS, Daily Kirley P, et al. Estimating influenza disease burden from population-based surveillance data in the United States. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0118369. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118369 
2. Rolfes, MA, Foppa, IM, Garg, S, et al. Annual estimates of the burden of seasonal influenza in the United States: A tool for strengthening influenza surveillance and preparedness. Influenza Other Respi Viruses. 2018; 12: 132– 137. https://doi.org/10.1111/irv.12486
3. Tokars JI, Rolfes MA, Foppa IM, Reed C. An evaluation and update of methods for estimating the number of influenza cases averted by vaccination in the United States. Vaccine. 2018;36(48):7331-7337. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.10.026 
4. Collier SA, Deng L, Adam EA, Benedict KM, Beshearse EM, Blackstock AJ, Bruce BB, Derado G, Edens C, Fullerton KE, Gargano JW, Geissler AL, Hall AJ, Havelaar AH, Hill VR, Hoekstra RM, Reddy SC, Scallan E, Stokes EK, Yoder JS, Beach MJ. Estimate of Burden and Direct Healthcare Cost of Infectious Waterborne Disease in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2021 Jan;27(1):140-149. doi: 10.3201/eid2701.190676. PMID: 33350905; PMCID: PMC7774540.
5. Reed C, Kim IK, Singleton JA,  et al. Estimated influenza illnesses and hospitalizations averted by vaccination–United States, 2013-14 influenza season. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 Dec 12;63(49):1151-4. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6349a2.htm 
6. Reed C, Angulo FJ, Swerdlow DL, et al. Estimates of the Prevalence of Pandemic (H1N1) 2009, United States, April–July 2009. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15(12):2004-2007. https://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1512.091413  
7. Devine O, Pham H, Gunnels B, et al. Extrapolating Sentinel Surveillance Information to Estimate National COVID-19 Hospital Admission Rates: A Bayesian Modeling Approach. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/irv.70026. Volume18, Issue10. October 2024.
8. https://www.cdc.gov/covid/php/covid-net/index.html">COVID-NET | COVID-19 | CDC 
9. https://www.cdc.gov/covid/hcp/clinical-care/systematic-review-process.html 
10. https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/1/3/pgac079/6604394?login=false">Excess natural-cause deaths in California by cause and setting: March 2020 through February 2021 | PNAS Nexus | Oxford Academic (oup.com)
11. Kruschke, J. K. 2011. Doing Bayesian data analysis: a tutorial with R and BUGS. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Section 3.3.5.

The data is based on U.S.Dept. of Veterans Affair Administration 2004dataset. It shows total number of veterans by county and total number of patients (veterans and their family members) treated by Veteran Affairs (VA) hospitals during 2004. http://www1.va.gov/vetdata/

This dataset displays data from the 2005 Census of Japan. It displays data on Institutional Households and Household Members throughout prefectures in Japan. This dataset specifically deals with Inpatients of Hospitals. This data comes from Japan's Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication's Statistics Bureau.

This dataset represents preliminary estimates of cumulative U.S. RSV –associated disease burden estimates for the 2024-2025 season, including outpatient visits, hospitalizations, and deaths. Real-time estimates are preliminary and based on continuously collected surveillance data from patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections. The data come from the Respiratory Syncytial Virus Hospitalization Surveillance Network (RSV-NET), a surveillance platform that captures data from hospitals that serve about 8% of the U.S. population. Each week CDC estimates a range (i.e., lower estimate and an upper estimate) of RSV-associated disease burden estimates that have occurred since October 1, 2024.

Note: Data are preliminary and subject to change as more data become available. Rates for recent RSV-associated hospital admissions are subject to reporting delays; as new data are received each week, previous rates are updated accordingly.

Note: Preliminary burden estimates are not inclusive of data from all RSV-NET sites. Due to model limitations, sites with small sample sizes can impact estimates in unpredictable ways and are excluded for the benefit of model stability. CDC is working to address model limitations and include data from all sites in final burden estimates.

References

1. Reed C, Chaves SS, Daily Kirley P, et al. Estimating influenza disease burden from population-based surveillance data in the United States. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0118369. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118369 
2. Rolfes, MA, Foppa, IM, Garg, S, et al. Annual estimates of the burden of seasonal influenza in the United States: A tool for strengthening influenza surveillance and preparedness. Influenza Other Respi Viruses. 2018; 12: 132– 137. https://doi.org/10.1111/irv.12486
3. Tokars JI, Rolfes MA, Foppa IM, Reed C. An evaluation and update of methods for estimating the number of influenza cases averted by vaccination in the United States. Vaccine. 2018;36(48):7331-7337. doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.10.026 
4. Collier SA, Deng L, Adam EA, Benedict KM, Beshearse EM, Blackstock AJ, Bruce BB, Derado G, Edens C, Fullerton KE, Gargano JW, Geissler AL, Hall AJ, Havelaar AH, Hill VR, Hoekstra RM, Reddy SC, Scallan E, Stokes EK, Yoder JS, Beach MJ. Estimate of Burden and Direct Healthcare Cost of Infectious Waterborne Disease in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2021 Jan;27(1):140-149. doi: 10.3201/eid2701.190676. PMID: 33350905; PMCID: PMC7774540.
5. Reed C, Kim IK, Singleton JA,  et al. Estimated influenza illnesses and hospitalizations averted by vaccination–United States, 2013-14 influenza season. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 Dec 12;63(49):1151-4. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6349a2.htm 
6. Reed C, Angulo FJ, Swerdlow DL, et al. Estimates of the Prevalence of Pandemic (H1N1) 2009, United States, April–July 2009. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15(12):2004-2007. https://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1512.091413  
7. Devine O, Pham H, Gunnels B, et al. Extrapolating Sentinel Surveillance Information to Estimate National COVID-19 Hospital Admission Rates: A Bayesian Modeling Approach. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/irv.70026. Volume18, Issue10. October 2024.
8. https://www.cdc.gov/covid/php/covid-net/index.html">COVID-NET | COVID-19 | CDC 
9. https://www.cdc.gov/covid/hcp/clinical-care/systematic-review-process.html 
10. https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/1/3/pgac079/6604394?login=false">Excess natural-cause deaths in California by cause and setting: March 2020 through February 2021 | PNAS Nexus | Oxford Academic (oup.com)
11. Kruschke, J. K. 2011. Doing Bayesian data analysis: a tutorial with R and BUGS. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Section 3.3.5.

Updates

• 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.

  • CDC Weekly case and death counts (national and state level)
  • CDC County level cases and deaths
  • HHS New hospital admissions
  • CDC NowCast COVID variant proportions (national and regional level)

• April 9, 2020

  • The population estimate data for New York County, NY has been updated to include all five New York City counties (Kings County, Queens County, Bronx County, Richmond County and New York County). This has been done to match the Johns Hopkins COVID-19 data, which aggregates counts for the five New York City counties to New York County.

• April 20, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins death totals in the US now include confirmed and probable deaths in accordance with CDC guidelines as of April 14. One significant result of this change was an increase of more than 3,700 deaths in the New York City count. This change will likely result in increases for death counts elsewhere as well. The AP does not alter the Johns Hopkins source data, so probable deaths are included in this dataset as well.

• April 29, 2020

  • The AP is now providing timeseries data for counts of COVID-19 cases and deaths. The raw counts are provided here unaltered, along with a population column with Census ACS-5 estimates and calculated daily case and death rates per 100,000 people. Please read the updated caveats section for more information.

• September 1st, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins is now providing counts for the five New York City counties individually.

• February 12, 2021

  • The Ohio Department of Health recently announced that as many as 4,000 COVID-19 deaths may have been underreported through the state’s reporting system, and that the "daily reported death counts will be high for a two to three-day period."
  • Because deaths data will be anomalous for consecutive days, we have chosen to freeze Ohio's rolling average for daily deaths at the last valid measure until Johns Hopkins is able to back-distribute the data. The raw daily death counts, as reported by Johns Hopkins and including the backlogged death data, will still be present in the new_deaths column.

• February 16, 2021

  - Johns Hopkins has reconciled Ohio's historical deaths data with the state.

  Overview

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.

Queries

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.

Interactive

The AP has designed an interactive map to track COVID-19 cases reported by Johns Hopkins.

@(https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/15/)

Interactive Embed Code

<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>

Caveats

• This data represents the number of cases and deaths reported by each state and has been collected by Johns Hopkins from a number of sources cited on their website.
• In some cases, deaths or cases of people who've crossed state lines -- either to receive treatment or because they became sick and couldn't return home while traveling -- are reported in a state they aren't currently in, because of state reporting rules.
• In some states, there are a number of cases not assigned to a specific county -- for those cases, the county name is "unassigned to a single county"
• This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University's COVID-19 tracking project. The AP is simply making it available here for ease of use for reporters and members.
• 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.
• Population estimates at the county level are drawn from 2014-18 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey.
• The Urban/Rural classification scheme is from the Center for Disease Control and Preventions's National Center for Health Statistics. It puts each county into one of six categories -- from Large Central Metro to Non-Core -- according to population and other characteristics. More details about the classifications can be found here.

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

Attribution

This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 tracking project

Abstract Background There are substantial opportunities to improve the quality of cardiovascular care in developing countries through the implementation of a quality program. Objective To evaluate the effect of a Best Practice in Cardiology (BPC) program on performance measures and patient outcomes related to heart failure, atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndromes in a subset of Brazilian public hospitals. Methods The Boas Práticas em Cardiologia (BPC) program was adapted from the American Heart Association’s (AHA) Get With The Guidelines (GWTG) Program for use in Brazil. The program is being started simultaneously in three care domains (acute coronary syndrome, atrial fibrillation and heart failure), which is an approach that has never been tested within the GWTG. There are six axes of interventions borrowed from knowledge translation literature that will address local barriers identified through structured interviews and regular audit and feedback meetings. The intervention is planned to include at least 10 hospitals and 1,500 patients per heart condition. The primary endpoint includes the rates of overall adherence to care measures recommended by the guidelines. Secondary endpoints include the effect of the program on length of stay, overall and specific mortality, readmission rates, quality of life, patients’ health perception and patients’ adherence to prescribed interventions. Results It is expected that participating hospitals will improve and sustain their overall adherence rates to evidence-based recommendations and patient outcomes. This is the first such cardiovascular quality improvement (QI) program in South America and will provide important information on how successful programs from developed countries like the United States can be adapted to meet the needs of countries with developing economies like Brazil. Also, a successful program will give valuable information for the development of QI programs in other developing countries. Conclusions This real-world study provides information for assessing and increasing adherence to cardiology guidelines in Brazil, as well as improvements in care processes. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2020; [online].ahead print, PP.0-0)

Hospital Price Transparency Platform Market Outlook

According to our latest research, the global hospital price transparency platform market size reached USD 1.42 billion in 2024, with a robust growth trajectory expected through the next decade. The market is projected to expand at a CAGR of 17.8% from 2025 to 2033, reaching an estimated USD 6.23 billion by 2033. This remarkable growth is propelled by stringent regulatory mandates, rising consumer demand for healthcare cost clarity, and the accelerated adoption of digital health solutions across the globe. The increasing emphasis on value-based care and the growing need for healthcare organizations to comply with governmental price transparency regulations are further fueling the expansion of the hospital price transparency platform market.

One of the primary growth factors for the hospital price transparency platform market is the evolving regulatory landscape, particularly in the United States and Europe. Mandates such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Price Transparency Rule, which requires hospitals to disclose their standard charges for items and services, have created a pressing need for robust digital platforms that can seamlessly aggregate, manage, and display pricing data. As a result, healthcare providers are increasingly investing in advanced price transparency solutions to ensure compliance, avoid penalties, and enhance their reputation as patient-centric organizations. Moreover, the proliferation of similar regulations in other regions is expected to drive global market adoption, as transparency becomes a universal expectation in healthcare delivery.

Another significant growth driver is the rising consumer demand for accessible and understandable healthcare pricing information. As patients shoulder a greater share of healthcare costs through high-deductible health plans and out-of-pocket expenses, there is mounting pressure on providers to deliver clear, accurate, and real-time pricing data. Hospital price transparency platforms empower patients to make informed decisions about their care by comparing prices, understanding potential costs, and selecting providers that best align with their financial and clinical needs. This shift toward patient empowerment is fostering a more competitive and consumer-friendly healthcare ecosystem, compelling providers to adopt advanced transparency tools that improve patient satisfaction and loyalty.

Technological advancements and the digital transformation of healthcare systems are also playing a pivotal role in the expansion of the hospital price transparency platform market. The integration of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and advanced analytics into these platforms enables healthcare organizations to automate complex pricing workflows, identify cost-saving opportunities, and generate actionable insights for both providers and patients. Cloud-based deployment models, interoperability with electronic health records (EHRs), and mobile accessibility are further enhancing the usability and scalability of price transparency solutions. As hospitals and health systems strive to optimize revenue cycle management, reduce administrative burdens, and meet evolving patient expectations, investment in innovative transparency platforms is becoming a strategic imperative.

From a regional perspective, North America currently dominates the hospital price transparency platform market, accounting for approximately 48% of global revenue in 2024, driven by stringent regulatory frameworks, high healthcare expenditure, and widespread digital adoption. Europe follows closely, with substantial growth anticipated in countries implementing price transparency mandates and digital health initiatives. The Asia Pacific region is poised for the fastest growth over the forecast period, fueled by expanding healthcare infrastructure, increasing government investment in health IT, and rising awareness of patient rights. Latin America and the Middle East & Africa are also witnessing steady adoption, albeit at a comparatively slower pace, due to evolving regulatory landscapes and infrastructural challenges.

Component Analysis

The hospital price transparency platform market is segmented by component into software and services, both of which play integral roles in the overall solution ecosystem. The software segment encompasses a wide array of applications, including pricing engines, data aggregation tools, compliance modules, and patient-facin

In 2022, roughly three in ten surveyed physicians worked in medical practices that were fewer than **** physicians in size. Another *** in ten physicians were in practices of **** to *** physicians, while **** percent were in practices with ** or more physicians. On the other hand, *** in ten physicians surveyed were directly employed or contracted by a hospital. U.S. physicians The number of active doctors of medicine in the U.S. has increased dramatically in the past 50 years. Currently, there are over ********* active doctors in the United States. Among all U.S. states, **********, followed by ********, was the state with the highest number of active physicians. It is estimated that there will be a deficit of over *** thousand physicians by 2030. Medical practices Many sources indicate that physicians are moving away from private practice and into practices owned by hospitals or medical groups. In 2022, a ******** of physicians were practice owners, partners or associates and over **** of physicians were employed by someone else. In the same year, a majority of U.S. physicians said that they are at full capacity or overworked within their practices while only *** ***** of physicians indicated that they had time to see more patients.