Meaning and prediction of "excess mortality": A comparison of Covid- and pre-Covid mortality data in 31 Eurostat countries from 1965 to 2021

IF 2.5 Q3 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS Biology Methods and Protocols Pub Date : 2024-05-17 DOI:10.1093/biomethods/bpae031
Bernhard Gill, Theresa Kehler, Michael Schneider
{"title":"Meaning and prediction of \"excess mortality\": A comparison of Covid- and pre-Covid mortality data in 31 Eurostat countries from 1965 to 2021","authors":"Bernhard Gill, Theresa Kehler, Michael Schneider","doi":"10.1093/biomethods/bpae031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Determining \"excess mortality\" makes it possible to compare the burden of disasters between countries and over time, and thus also to evaluate the success of mitigation measures. However, the debate on Covid-19 has exposed that calculations of excess mortalities vary considerably depending on the method and its specification. Moreover, it is often unclear what exactly is meant by \"excess mortality\". We define excess mortality as the excess over the number of deaths that would have been expected counter-factually, ie without the catastrophic event in question. Based on this definition, we use a very parsimonious calculation method, namely the linear extrapolation of death figures from previous years to determine the excess mortality during the Covid-19 pandemic. But unlike most other literature on this topic, we first evaluated and optimised the specification of our method using a larger historical data set in order to identify and minimise estimation errors and biases. The result shows that excess mortality rates in the literature are often inflated. Moreover, they would have exhibited considerable excess mortalities in the period before Covid-19, if this value had already been of public interest at that time. Three conclusions can be drawn from this study and its findings: 1) All calculation methods for current figures should first be evaluated against past figures. 2) To avoid alarm fatigue, for mass media and policy communication thresholds should be introduced which would differentiate between \"usual fluctuations\" and \"remarkable excess\". 3) Statistical offices could provide more realistic estimates.","PeriodicalId":36528,"journal":{"name":"Biology Methods and Protocols","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology Methods and Protocols","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/biomethods/bpae031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Determining "excess mortality" makes it possible to compare the burden of disasters between countries and over time, and thus also to evaluate the success of mitigation measures. However, the debate on Covid-19 has exposed that calculations of excess mortalities vary considerably depending on the method and its specification. Moreover, it is often unclear what exactly is meant by "excess mortality". We define excess mortality as the excess over the number of deaths that would have been expected counter-factually, ie without the catastrophic event in question. Based on this definition, we use a very parsimonious calculation method, namely the linear extrapolation of death figures from previous years to determine the excess mortality during the Covid-19 pandemic. But unlike most other literature on this topic, we first evaluated and optimised the specification of our method using a larger historical data set in order to identify and minimise estimation errors and biases. The result shows that excess mortality rates in the literature are often inflated. Moreover, they would have exhibited considerable excess mortalities in the period before Covid-19, if this value had already been of public interest at that time. Three conclusions can be drawn from this study and its findings: 1) All calculation methods for current figures should first be evaluated against past figures. 2) To avoid alarm fatigue, for mass media and policy communication thresholds should be introduced which would differentiate between "usual fluctuations" and "remarkable excess". 3) Statistical offices could provide more realistic estimates.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超额死亡率 "的含义和预测:1965年至2021年欧盟统计局31个国家Covid死亡率数据与Covid前死亡率数据的比较
确定 "超额死亡率 "可以比较不同国家和不同时期的灾害负担,从而评估减灾措施是否成功。然而,关于 Covid-19 的讨论表明,超额死亡率的计算方法和具体说明大相径庭。此外,"超额死亡率 "的确切含义通常也不明确。我们将超额死亡率定义为超出反事实预期死亡人数的部分,即没有发生相关灾难事件时的预期死亡人数。根据这一定义,我们采用了一种非常简便的计算方法,即通过对前几年的死亡数字进行线性外推来确定 Covid-19 大流行期间的超额死亡率。但与其他大多数相关文献不同的是,我们首先利用一个更大的历史数据集对我们的方法进行了评估和优化,以确定并尽量减少估计误差和偏差。结果表明,文献中的超额死亡率往往被夸大了。此外,如果这一数值当时已经引起公众的关注,那么在科维德-19 之前的时期,它们就会表现出相当高的超额死亡率。从这项研究及其结果中可以得出三个结论:1) 当前数据的所有计算方法都应首先对照过去的数据进行评估。2) 为避免 "警报疲劳",在大众传媒和政策沟通中应引入阈值,以区分 "通常的波动" 和 "显著的过度"。3) 统计部门可以提供更切合实际的估计数字。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Biology Methods and Protocols
Biology Methods and Protocols Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agricultural and Biological Sciences (all)
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
28
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Optimizing Western blotting immunodetection: Streamlining antibody cocktails for reduced protocol time and enhanced multiplexing applications. Live cell fluorescence microscopy-an end-to-end workflow for high-throughput image and data analysis. A reproducible method to study traumatic injury-induced zebrafish brain regeneration. Cluster analysis identifies long COVID subtypes in Belgian patients. Unpacking unstructured data: A pilot study on extracting insights from neuropathological reports of Parkinson's Disease patients using large language models.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1