The New York Times is releasing a series of data files with cumulative counts of coronavirus cases in the United States, at the state and county level, over time. We are compiling this time series data from state and local governments and health departments in an attempt to provide a complete record of the ongoing outbreak.

Since late January, The Times has tracked cases of coronavirus in real time as they were identified after testing. Because of the widespread shortage of testing, however, the data is necessarily limited in the picture it presents of the outbreak.

We have used this data to power our maps and reporting tracking the outbreak, and it is now being made available to the public in response to requests from researchers, scientists and government officials who would like access to the data to better understand the outbreak.

The data begins with the first reported coronavirus case in Washington State on Jan. 21, 2020. We will publish regular updates to the data in this repository.

As of May 2, 2023, there were roughly 687 million global cases of COVID-19. Around 660 million people had recovered from the disease, while there had been almost 6.87 million deaths. The United States, India, and Brazil have been among the countries hardest hit by the pandemic.

The various types of human coronavirus The SARS-CoV-2 virus is the seventh known coronavirus to infect humans. Its emergence makes it the third in recent years to cause widespread infectious disease following the viruses responsible for SARS and MERS. A continual problem is that viruses naturally mutate as they attempt to survive. Notable new variants of SARS-CoV-2 were first identified in the UK, South Africa, and Brazil. Variants are of particular interest because they are associated with increased transmission.

Vaccination campaigns Common human coronaviruses typically cause mild symptoms such as a cough or a cold, but the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has led to more severe respiratory illnesses and deaths worldwide. Several COVID-19 vaccines have now been approved and are being used around the world.

An in depth study on patients admitted to hospital and later deceased with the coronavirus (COVID-19) infection revealed that the majority of cases showed one or more comorbidities. As the chart shows, hypertension was the most common pre-existing health condition, detected in 65.8 percent of patients who died after contracting the virus. Type 2-diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and atrial fibrillation were also among the most common comorbidities in COVID-19 patients who lost their lives. More statistics and facts about the virus in Italy are available here. For a global overview visit Statista's webpage exclusively dedicated to coronavirus, its development, and its impact.

Most common COVID-19 impacts in each EPII domain by the surveyed student sample (N = 909) and by sex.

While research about the coronavirus (COVID-19) is ongoing, a list of certain symptoms has emerged. The fact that some of these coincide with the symptoms of a common cold makes it difficult to determine at first whether an individual has a COVID-19 infection or not. In Germany, the symptom experienced most often in connection with the virus was a cough, followed by a runny nose and fever.

A novel virus

There have also been cases when an infected individual experienced mild COVID-19 symptoms or even none at all. The coronavirus (COVID-19) is a respiratory disease and therefore poses specific risks, besides having the potential to spread with enormous speed among people. More severe symptoms, such as pneumonia, are also possible and lead to hospitalization. Several vaccines to combat COVID-19 have since been developed and approved for use. In Germany, case numbers fluctuate among age groups, increasingly affecting younger people.

Deaths

Based on surveys conducted during the outbreak, roughly half of the German population considered their health to be at risk because of the coronavirus (COVID-19). Death numbers varied by age group and gender, but more men than women have died from the disease.

COVID-19 Trends MethodologyOur goal is to analyze and present daily updates in the form of recent trends within countries, states, or counties during the COVID-19 global pandemic. The data we are analyzing is taken directly from the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases Dashboard, though we expect to be one day behind the dashboard’s live feeds to allow for quality assurance of the data.Revisions added on 4/23/2020 are highlighted.Revisions added on 4/30/2020 are highlighted.Discussion of our assertion of an abundance of caution in assigning trends in rural counties added 5/7/2020. Correction on 6/1/2020Methodology update on 6/2/2020: This sets the length of the tail of new cases to 6 to a maximum of 14 days, rather than 21 days as determined by the last 1/3 of cases. This was done to align trends and criteria for them with U.S. CDC guidance. The impact is areas transition into Controlled trend sooner for not bearing the burden of new case 15-21 days earlier.Reasons for undertaking this work:The popular online maps and dashboards show counts of confirmed cases, deaths, and recoveries by country or administrative sub-region. Comparing the counts of one country to another can only provide a basis for comparison during the initial stages of the outbreak when counts were low and the number of local outbreaks in each country was low. By late March 2020, countries with small populations were being left out of the mainstream news because it was not easy to recognize they had high per capita rates of cases (Switzerland, Luxembourg, Iceland, etc.). Additionally, comparing countries that have had confirmed COVID-19 cases for high numbers of days to countries where the outbreak occurred recently is also a poor basis for comparison.The graphs of confirmed cases and daily increases in cases were fit into a standard size rectangle, though the Y-axis for one country had a maximum value of 50, and for another country 100,000, which potentially misled people interpreting the slope of the curve. Such misleading circumstances affected comparing large population countries to small population counties or countries with low numbers of cases to China which had a large count of cases in the early part of the outbreak. These challenges for interpreting and comparing these graphs represent work each reader must do based on their experience and ability. Thus, we felt it would be a service to attempt to automate the thought process experts would use when visually analyzing these graphs, particularly the most recent tail of the graph, and provide readers with an a resulting synthesis to characterize the state of the pandemic in that country, state, or county.The lack of reliable data for confirmed recoveries and therefore active cases. Merely subtracting deaths from total cases to arrive at this figure progressively loses accuracy after two weeks. The reason is 81% of cases recover after experiencing mild symptoms in 10 to 14 days. Severe cases are 14% and last 15-30 days (based on average days with symptoms of 11 when admitted to hospital plus 12 days median stay, and plus of one week to include a full range of severely affected people who recover). Critical cases are 5% and last 31-56 days. Sources:U.S. CDC. April 3, 2020 Interim Clinical Guidance for Management of Patients with Confirmed Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19). Accessed online. Initial older guidance was also obtained online. Additionally, many people who recover may not be tested, and many who are, may not be tracked due to privacy laws. Thus, the formula used to compute an estimate of active cases is: Active Cases = 100% of new cases in past 14 days + 19% from past 15-30 days + 5% from past 31-56 days - total deaths.We’ve never been inside a pandemic with the ability to learn of new cases as they are confirmed anywhere in the world. After reviewing epidemiological and pandemic scientific literature, three needs arose. We need to specify which portions of the pandemic lifecycle this map cover. The World Health Organization (WHO) specifies six phases. The source data for this map begins just after the beginning of Phase 5: human to human spread and encompasses Phase 6: pandemic phase. Phase six is only characterized in terms of pre- and post-peak. However, these two phases are after-the-fact analyses and cannot ascertained during the event. Instead, we describe (below) a series of five trends for Phase 6 of the COVID-19 pandemic.Choosing terms to describe the five trends was informed by the scientific literature, particularly the use of epidemic, which signifies uncontrolled spread. The five trends are: Emergent, Spreading, Epidemic, Controlled, and End Stage. Not every locale will experience all five, but all will experience at least three: emergent, controlled, and end stage.This layer presents the current trends for the COVID-19 pandemic by country (or appropriate level). There are five trends:Emergent: Early stages of outbreak. Spreading: Early stages and depending on an administrative area’s capacity, this may represent a manageable rate of spread. Epidemic: Uncontrolled spread. Controlled: Very low levels of new casesEnd Stage: No New cases These trends can be applied at several levels of administration: Local: Ex., City, District or County – a.k.a. Admin level 2State: Ex., State or Province – a.k.a. Admin level 1National: Country – a.k.a. Admin level 0Recommend that at least 100,000 persons be represented by a unit; granted this may not be possible, and then the case rate per 100,000 will become more important.Key Concepts and Basis for Methodology: 10 Total Cases minimum threshold: Empirically, there must be enough cases to constitute an outbreak. Ideally, this would be 5.0 per 100,000, but not every area has a population of 100,000 or more. Ten, or fewer, cases are also relatively less difficult to track and trace to sources. 21 Days of Cases minimum threshold: Empirically based on COVID-19 and would need to be adjusted for any other event. 21 days is also the minimum threshold for analyzing the “tail” of the new cases curve, providing seven cases as the basis for a likely trend (note that 21 days in the tail is preferred). This is the minimum needed to encompass the onset and duration of a normal case (5-7 days plus 10-14 days). Specifically, a median of 5.1 days incubation time, and 11.2 days for 97.5% of cases to incubate. This is also driven by pressure to understand trends and could easily be adjusted to 28 days. Source used as basis:Stephen A. Lauer, MS, PhD *; Kyra H. Grantz, BA *; Qifang Bi, MHS; Forrest K. Jones, MPH; Qulu Zheng, MHS; Hannah R. Meredith, PhD; Andrew S. Azman, PhD; Nicholas G. Reich, PhD; Justin Lessler, PhD. 2020. The Incubation Period of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) From Publicly Reported Confirmed Cases: Estimation and Application. Annals of Internal Medicine DOI: 10.7326/M20-0504.New Cases per Day (NCD) = Measures the daily spread of COVID-19. This is the basis for all rates. Back-casting revisions: In the Johns Hopkins’ data, the structure is to provide the cumulative number of cases per day, which presumes an ever-increasing sequence of numbers, e.g., 0,0,1,1,2,5,7,7,7, etc. However, revisions do occur and would look like, 0,0,1,1,2,5,7,7,6. To accommodate this, we revised the lists to eliminate decreases, which make this list look like, 0,0,1,1,2,5,6,6,6.Reporting Interval: In the early weeks, Johns Hopkins' data provided reporting every day regardless of change. In late April, this changed allowing for days to be skipped if no new data was available. The day was still included, but the value of total cases was set to Null. The processing therefore was updated to include tracking of the spacing between intervals with valid values.100 News Cases in a day as a spike threshold: Empirically, this is based on COVID-19’s rate of spread, or r0 of ~2.5, which indicates each case will infect between two and three other people. There is a point at which each administrative area’s capacity will not have the resources to trace and account for all contacts of each patient. Thus, this is an indicator of uncontrolled or epidemic trend. Spiking activity in combination with the rate of new cases is the basis for determining whether an area has a spreading or epidemic trend (see below). Source used as basis:World Health Organization (WHO). 16-24 Feb 2020. Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Obtained online.Mean of Recent Tail of NCD = Empirical, and a COVID-19-specific basis for establishing a recent trend. The recent mean of NCD is taken from the most recent fourteen days. A minimum of 21 days of cases is required for analysis but cannot be considered reliable. Thus, a preference of 42 days of cases ensures much higher reliability. This analysis is not explanatory and thus, merely represents a likely trend. The tail is analyzed for the following:Most recent 2 days: In terms of likelihood, this does not mean much, but can indicate a reason for hope and a basis to share positive change that is not yet a trend. There are two worthwhile indicators:Last 2 days count of new cases is less than any in either the past five or 14 days. Past 2 days has only one or fewer new cases – this is an extremely positive outcome if the rate of testing has continued at the same rate as the previous 5 days or 14 days. Most recent 5 days: In terms of likelihood, this is more meaningful, as it does represent at short-term trend. There are five worthwhile indicators:Past five days is greater than past 2 days and past 14 days indicates the potential of the past 2 days being an aberration. Past five days is greater than past 14 days and less than past 2 days indicates slight positive trend, but likely still within peak trend time frame.Past five days is less than the past 14 days. This means a downward trend. This would be an

BackgroundPrimary care patients, especially those with an older age, are one of the most vulnerable populations for post-COVID-19 symptoms. Identifying predictors of post-COVID symptoms can help identify high-risk individuals for preventive care.MethodsOut of 977 primary care patients aged 55 years or above with comorbid physical and psychosocial conditions in a prospective cohort in Hong Kong, 207 patients infected in the previous 5–24 weeks were included. The three most common post-COVID-19 symptoms (breathlessness, fatigue, cognitive difficulty), which lasted beyond the 4-week acute infection period, were assessed using items from the COVID-19 Yorkshire Rehabilitation Scale (C19-YRS), together with other self-reported symptoms. Multivariable analyses were conducted to identify predictors of post-acute and long COVID-19 symptoms (5–24 weeks after infection).ResultsThe 207 participants had a mean age of 70.8 ± 5.7 years, 76.3% were female, and 78.7% had ≥2 chronic conditions. In total, 81.2% reported at least one post-COVID symptom (mean: 1.9 ± 1.3); 60.9, 56.5 and 30.0% reported fatigue, cognitive difficulty, and breathlessness respectively; 46.1% reported at least one other new symptom (such as other respiratory-related symptoms (14.0%), insomnia or poor sleep quality (14.0%), and ear/nose/throat symptoms (e.g., sore throat) (10.1%), etc.). Depression predicted post-COVID-19 fatigue. The female sex predicted cognitive difficulty. Receiving fewer vaccine doses (2 doses vs. 3 doses) was associated with breathlessness. Anxiety predicted a higher overall symptom severity level of the three common symptoms.ConclusionDepression, the female sex, and fewer vaccine doses predicted post-COVID symptoms. Promoting vaccination and providing intervention to those at high-risk for post-COVID symptoms are warranted.

This release features the dataset recorded using our prototype hardware device (contact-based) that collects accelerometer and temperature readings to investigate breathing patterns, personal activity and cough patterns. As fever and cough are considered as two of the most common symptoms for COVID-19, our aim was to focus on these physiological features. In addition, research also states that all COVID-19 contractions showed elevated breathing patterns in patients, that could be easily identifiable from Eupnea state. Therefore, in this research project, we aimed at:
1. Designing a prototype chest-worn device to measure dynamic chest movements (to record breathing and cough patterns)
2. Detect different activity patterns
3. Record temperature variations during idle and active stage
4. Using unsupervised machine learning algorithm to detect anomalies by creating a composite score for (breathing and cough patterns as well as temperature).

This release also features some code examples that were used for data pre-processing, feature identification and anomaly detection using (K-means and DBSCAN algorithms).

It is important to note that this dataset should be considered and further investigated for preliminary exploratory analysis. The data was collected from healthy adults (that did not undergo COVID-19 clinical screening tests). Therefore, it must be clearly identified that this dataset DOES NOT represent positive COVID-19 contractions.

--Published Articles

[1]. O. Ali, M. K. Ishak and M. Kamran, "Early covid-19 symptoms identification using hybrid unsupervised machine learning techniques," Computers, Materials & Continua, vol. 69, no.1, pp. 747–766, 2021.

Background This bibliometric analysis examines the top 50 most-cited articles on COVID-19 complications, offering insights into the multifaceted impact of the virus. Since its emergence in Wuhan in December 2019, COVID-19 has evolved into a global health crisis, with over 770 million confirmed cases and 6.9 million deaths as of September 2023. Initially recognized as a respiratory illness causing pneumonia and ARDS, its diverse complications extend to cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, renal, hematological, neurological, endocrinological, ophthalmological, hepatobiliary, and dermatological systems. Methods Identifying the top 50 articles from a pool of 5940 in Scopus, the analysis spans November 2019 to July 2021, employing terms related to COVID-19 and complications. Rigorous review criteria excluded non-relevant studies, basic science research, and animal models. The authors independently reviewed articles, considering factors like title, citations, publication year, journal, impact fa..., A bibliometric analysis of the most cited articles about COVID-19 complications was conducted in July 2021 using all journals indexed in Elsevier’s Scopus and Thomas Reuter’s Web of Science from November 1, 2019 to July 1, 2021. All journals were selected for inclusion regardless of country of origin, language, medical speciality, or electronic availability of articles or abstracts. The terms were combined as follows: (“COVID-19†OR “COVID19†OR “SARS-COV-2†OR “SARSCOV2†OR “SARS 2†OR “Novel coronavirus†OR “2019-nCov†OR “Coronavirus†) AND (“Complication†OR “Long Term Complication†OR “Post-Intensive Care Syndrome†OR “Venous Thromboembolism†OR “Acute Kidney Injury†OR “Acute Liver Injury†OR “Post COVID-19 Syndrome†OR “Acute Cardiac Injury†OR “Cardiac Arrest†OR “Stroke†OR “Embolism†OR “Septic Shock†OR “Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation†OR “Secondary Infection†OR “Blood Clots† OR “Cytokine Release Syndrome†OR “Paediatric Inflammatory Multisystem Syndrome†OR “Vaccine..., , # Data of top 50 most cited articles about COVID-19 and the complications of COVID-19

This dataset contains information about the top 50 most cited articles about COVID-19 and the complications of COVID-19. We have looked into a variety of research and clinical factors for the analysis.

Description of the data and file structure

The data sheet offers a comprehensive analysis of the selected articles. It delves into specifics such as the publication year of the top 50 articles, the journals responsible for publishing them, and the geographical region with the highest number of citations in this elite list. Moreover, the sheet sheds light on the key players involved, including authors and their affiliated departments, in crafting the top 50 most cited articles.

Beyond these fundamental aspects, the data sheet goes on to provide intricate details related to the study types and topics prevalent in the top 50 articles. To enrich the analysis, it incorporates clinical data, capturing...

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

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

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

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in 2019 and has since caused a global pandemic. Since its emergence, COVID-19 has hugely impacted healthcare, including pediatrics. This study aimed to explore the current status and hotspots of pediatric COVID-19 research using bibliometric analysis.MethodsThe Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science core collection database was searched for articles on pediatric COVID-19 to identify original articles that met the criteria. The retrieval period ranged from the creation of the database to September 20, 2021. A total of 3,561 original articles written in English were selected to obtain data, such as author names, titles, source publications, number of citations, author affiliations, and countries where the studies were conducted. Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA) was used to create charts related to countries, authors, and institutions. VOSviewer (Center for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden, The Netherlands) was used to create visual network diagrams of keyword, author, and country co-occurrence.ResultsWe screened 3,561 publications with a total citation frequency of 30,528. The United States had the most published articles (1188 articles) and contributed the most with author co-occurrences. The author with the most published articles was Villani from the University of Padua, Italy. He also contributed the most co-authored articles. The most productive institution was Huazhong University of Science and Technology in China. The institution with the most frequently cited published articles was Shanghai Jiao Tong University in China. The United States cooperated most with other countries. Research hotspots were divided into two clusters: social research and clinical research. Besides COVID-19 and children, the most frequent keywords were pandemic (251 times), mental health (187 times), health (172 times), impact (148 times), and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (144 times).ConclusionPediatric COVID-19 has attracted considerable attention worldwide, leading to a considerable number of articles published over the past 2 years. The United States, China, and Italy have leading roles in pediatric COVID-19 research. The new research hotspot is gradually shifting from COVID-19 and its related clinical studies to studies of its psychological and social impacts on children.

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

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

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

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

This was a cross-sectional nationwide survey of adults in the US conducted between April 24 and May 13, 2020. The survey targeted a representative sample of approximately 5,000 respondents. The rate of COVID-19 cases and testing, most frequently reported symptoms, symptom severity, treatment received, impact of COVID-19 on mental and physical health, and factors predictive of testing positive were assessed.

THIS IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT OF CORONAVIRUS MISINFORMATION AND/OR DENIAL. THE AUTHOR OF THIS DATASET DOES NOT ENDORSE COVID-19 DENIAL OR MISINFORMATION AND THE INFORMATION IN THIS DATASET SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS FACT

Context

COVID-19 denial has become rampant online. The subreddit r/NoNewNormal was created and turned into a hub of denial and misinformation about COVID-19, vaccines and masks. As it becomes more likely that the sub will be deleted, I archived everything I could. Why? So that COVID misinformation accounts can be identified and archived.

Content

The posts inside total over 700,000, almost all posts from r/NoNewNormal made. I scraped it with psaw (Pushshift API Wrapper for Python). For each post, a username, timestamp and id is shown for every archived post.

Acknowledgements

Thank you to the devs of the Pushshift API!

Inspiration

Things I want to see done with the dataset: - Most common COVID-19 misinformation arguments - Graph of activity over all time Feel free to use it how you like.

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in 2019 and has since caused a global pandemic. Since its emergence, COVID-19 has hugely impacted healthcare, including pediatrics. This study aimed to explore the current status and hotspots of pediatric COVID-19 research using bibliometric analysis.MethodsThe Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science core collection database was searched for articles on pediatric COVID-19 to identify original articles that met the criteria. The retrieval period ranged from the creation of the database to September 20, 2021. A total of 3,561 original articles written in English were selected to obtain data, such as author names, titles, source publications, number of citations, author affiliations, and countries where the studies were conducted. Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA) was used to create charts related to countries, authors, and institutions. VOSviewer (Center for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden, The Netherlands) was used to create visual network diagrams of keyword, author, and country co-occurrence.ResultsWe screened 3,561 publications with a total citation frequency of 30,528. The United States had the most published articles (1188 articles) and contributed the most with author co-occurrences. The author with the most published articles was Villani from the University of Padua, Italy. He also contributed the most co-authored articles. The most productive institution was Huazhong University of Science and Technology in China. The institution with the most frequently cited published articles was Shanghai Jiao Tong University in China. The United States cooperated most with other countries. Research hotspots were divided into two clusters: social research and clinical research. Besides COVID-19 and children, the most frequent keywords were pandemic (251 times), mental health (187 times), health (172 times), impact (148 times), and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (144 times).ConclusionPediatric COVID-19 has attracted considerable attention worldwide, leading to a considerable number of articles published over the past 2 years. The United States, China, and Italy have leading roles in pediatric COVID-19 research. The new research hotspot is gradually shifting from COVID-19 and its related clinical studies to studies of its psychological and social impacts on children.

Note: This dataset is no longer being updated due to the end of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) is identifying ​the prevalence of circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants by analyzing ​CDPH Genomic Surveillance Data and ​CalREDIE, CDPH's communicable disease reporting and surveillance system. Viruses mutate into new strains or variants over time. Some variants emerge and then disappear. Other variants become common and circulate for a long time. Several specialized laboratories statewide sequence the genomes of a fraction of all positive COVID-19 tests to determine which variants are circulating. Sequencing and reporting of variant results takes several days after a test is identified as a positive for COVID-19. Not all ​viruses from positive COVID-19 tests are ​sequenced. Knowing what variants are circulating in California informs public health and clinical action. Note: There is a natural reporting lag in these data due to the time commitment to complete whole genome sequencing; therefore, a 14 day lag is applied to these datasets to allow for data completeness. Please note that more recent data should be used with caution. For more information, please see: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/COVID-Variants.aspx

NOTE: This dataset replaces two previous ones. Please see below. Chicago residents who are up to date with COVID-19 vaccines, based on the reported address, race-ethnicity, sex, and age group of the person vaccinated, as provided by the medical provider in the Illinois Comprehensive Automated Immunization Registry Exchange (I-CARE). “Up to date” refers to individuals who meet the CDC’s updated COVID-19 vaccination criteria based on their age and prior vaccination history. For surveillance purposes, up to date is defined based on the following criteria: People ages 5 years and older: · Are up to date when they receive 1+ doses of a COVID-19 vaccine during the current season. Children ages 6 months to 4 years: · Children who have received at least two prior COVID-19 vaccine doses are up to date when they receive one additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine during the current season, regardless of vaccine product. · Children who have received only one prior COVID-19 vaccine dose are up to date when they receive one additional dose of the current season's Moderna COVID-19 vaccine or two additional doses of the current season's Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. · Children who have never received a COVID-19 vaccination are up to date when they receive either two doses of the current season's Moderna vaccine or three doses of the current season's Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. This dataset takes the place of two previous datasets, which cover doses administered from December 15, 2020 through September 13, 2023 and are marked has historical: - https://data.cityofchicago.org/Health-Human-Services/COVID-19-Daily-Vaccinations-Chicago-Residents/2vhs-cf6b - https://data.cityofchicago.org/Health-Human-Services/COVID-19-Vaccinations-by-Age-and-Race-Ethnicity/37ac-bbe3. Data Notes: Weekly cumulative totals of people up to date are shown for each combination of race-ethnicity, sex, and age group. Note that race-ethnicity, age, and sex all have an option for “All” so care should be taken when summing rows. Coverage percentages are calculated based on the cumulative number of people in each race-ethnicity/age/sex population subgroup who are considered up to date as of the week ending date divided by the estimated number of people in that subgroup. Population counts are obtained from the 2020 U.S. Decennial Census. Actual counts may exceed population estimates and lead to coverage estimates that are greater than 100%, especially in smaller demographic groupings with smaller populations. Additionally, the medical provider may report incorrect demographic information for the person receiving the vaccination, which may lead to over- or underestimation of vaccination coverage. All coverage percentages are capped at 99%. Weekly cumulative counts and coverage percentages are reported from the week ending Saturday, September 16, 2023 onward through the Saturday prior to the dataset being updated. All data are provisional and subject to change. Information is updated as additional details are received and it is, in fact, very common for recent dates to be incomplete and to be updated as time goes on. At any given time, this dataset reflects data currently known to CDPH. Numbers in this dataset may differ from other public sources due to when data are reported and how City of Chicago boundaries are defined. The Chicago Department of Public Health uses the most complete data available to estimate COVID-19 vaccination coverage among Chicagoans, but there are several limitations that impact our estimates. Individuals may receive vaccinations that are not recorded in the Illinois immunization registry, I-CARE, such as those administered in another state, causing underestimation of the number individuals who are up to date. Inconsistencies in records of separate doses administered to the same person, such as slight variations in dates of birth, can result in duplicate records for a person and underestimate the number of people who are up to date.

Effective September 27, 2023, this dataset will no longer be updated. Similar data are accessible from wonder.cdc.gov. This visualization provides weekly data on the number of deaths by jurisdiction of occurrence and cause of death. Counts of deaths in more recent weeks can be compared with counts from earlier years to determine if the number is higher than expected. Selected causes of death are shown, based on analyses of the most prevalent comorbid conditions reported on death certificates where COVID-19 was listed as a cause of death (see https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#Comorbidities). Cause of death counts are based on the underlying cause of death, and presented for Respiratory diseases, Circulatory diseases, Malignant neoplasms, and Alzheimer disease and dementia. Estimated numbers of deaths due to these other causes of death could represent misclassified COVID-19 deaths, or potentially could be indirectly related to COVID-19 (e.g., deaths from other causes occurring in the context of health care shortages or overburdened health care systems). Deaths with an underlying cause of death of COVID-19 are not included in these estimates of deaths due to other causes. Deaths due to external causes (i.e. injuries) or unknown causes are excluded. For more detail, see the Technical Notes.

Background: International travel during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic carries a certain magnitude of infection risk both to travelers and their destination, which may be difficult to assess in the early stage. The characteristics of common infectious diseases of tourists may provide some clues to identify the high-risk travelers and protect susceptible population.Methods: From among 48,444 travelers screened at Shanghai Port, we analyzed 577 travelers with 590 infectious diseases for age, sex, disease type, and World Health Organization (WHO) regions. We used the Joinpoint Regression Program to identify the average percent changes (APC) in the various trends among these individuals.Results: Hepatitis B, syphilis, and HIV were the most common infectious diseases in travelers entering China, and Hepatitis B, pulmonary tuberculosis, and syphilis in Chinese nationals traveling abroad (overall detection rates, 1.43 and 0.74%, respectively; P < 0.05). Africa (2.96%), the Americas (1.68%), and the Western Pacific (1.62%) exhibited the highest detection rates. This trend did not decrease since the COVID-19 pandemic (P > 0.05) and rather showed an upward trend with increasing age [APC 95% CI = 5.46 (3.41,7.56)%, P < 0.05]. However, there were no evident trends in monthly infection rates of travelers exiting and entering China from different WHO regions (all P > 0.05).Conclusion: Travelers always carry a transmission risk of common infectious diseases. It may be reasonable to adjust strategies for airport screening and quarantine according to the age and departure area of travelers to prevent and control new infectious diseases.