Suppr超能文献

2020-2021 年不同经验性计算方法得出的大流行超额死亡率比较。

Comparison of pandemic excess mortality in 2020-2021 across different empirical calculations.

机构信息

Department of Structural Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.

Shanghai Institute for Advanced Immunochemical Studies, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai, 201210, China.

出版信息

Environ Res. 2022 Oct;213:113754. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.113754. Epub 2022 Jun 24.

Abstract

Different modeling approaches can be used to calculate excess deaths for the COVID-19 pandemic period. We compared 6 calculations of excess deaths (4 previously published [3 without age-adjustment] and two new ones that we performed with and without age-adjustment) for 2020-2021. With each approach, we calculated excess deaths metrics and the ratio R of excess deaths over recorded COVID-19 deaths. The main analysis focused on 33 high-income countries with weekly deaths in the Human Mortality Database (HMD at mortality.org) and reliable death registration. Secondary analyses compared calculations for other countries, whenever available. Across the 33 high-income countries, excess deaths were 2.0-2.8 million without age-adjustment, and 1.6-2.1 million with age-adjustment with large differences across countries. In our analyses after age-adjustment, 8 of 33 countries had no overall excess deaths; there was a death deficit in children; and 0.478 million (29.7%) of the excess deaths were in people <65 years old. In countries like France, Germany, Italy, and Spain excess death estimates differed 2 to 4-fold between highest and lowest figures. The R values' range exceeded 0.3 in all 33 countries. In 16 of 33 countries, the range of R exceeded 1. In 25 of 33 countries some calculations suggest R > 1 (excess deaths exceeding COVID-19 deaths) while others suggest R < 1 (excess deaths smaller than COVID-19 deaths). Inferred data from 4 evaluations for 42 countries and from 3 evaluations for another 98 countries are very tenuous. Estimates of excess deaths are analysis-dependent and age-adjustment is important to consider. Excess deaths may be lower than previously calculated.

摘要

不同的建模方法可用于计算 COVID-19 大流行期间的超额死亡人数。我们比较了 2020-2021 年的 6 种超额死亡计算方法(4 种之前发表的[3 种未经年龄调整]和我们进行的另外 2 种经年龄调整和未经年龄调整的方法)。对于每种方法,我们计算了超额死亡指标和超额死亡与记录的 COVID-19 死亡之比 R。主要分析侧重于 33 个高收入国家,这些国家在人类死亡率数据库(mortality.org 上的 HMD)中每周有死亡记录,且死亡登记可靠。在其他国家有可用数据的情况下,我们进行了次要分析。在 33 个高收入国家中,未经年龄调整的超额死亡人数为 200 万至 280 万,经年龄调整的超额死亡人数为 160 万至 210 万,各国之间存在较大差异。在我们进行年龄调整后的分析中,33 个国家中有 8 个国家没有总体超额死亡;儿童有死亡不足;0.478 百万(29.7%)的超额死亡发生在 65 岁以下的人群中。在法国、德国、意大利和西班牙等国家,最高和最低估计值之间的超额死亡估计差异高达 2 至 4 倍。所有 33 个国家的 R 值范围都超过 0.3。在 33 个国家中的 16 个国家,R 值范围超过 1。在 33 个国家中的 25 个国家中,一些计算结果表明 R>1(超额死亡超过 COVID-19 死亡),而其他计算结果表明 R<1(超额死亡小于 COVID-19 死亡)。来自 42 个国家的 4 项评估和另外 98 个国家的 3 项评估的推断数据非常脆弱。超额死亡的估计值取决于分析,且年龄调整非常重要。超额死亡可能低于之前的计算。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bb6b/9225924/013cfd27400a/gr1_lrg.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验