These new figures are not ‘more accurate’ or a ‘truer picture’ they’re less so

Headlined by BBC UK:

‘Figures released in the last hour in Scotland suggest more people have died after contracting coronavirus than previously announced There’s been a BIG jump in the deaths linked to covid-19 here in Scotland. These new statistics from the National Records of Scotland show that 354 have died after testing positive for covid-19 and also include the deaths where the virus was a probable contributing factor….It is broader it is more accurate.

You can see the appeal of this for the UK media on the day when research reported in the Guardian, but ignored elsewhere, predicted the shocking news that the UK is projected to have recorded more Covid-19 deaths than Italy, Spain, France and Germany combined: [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/07/uk-will-be-europes-worst-hit-by-coronavirus-study-predicts]

This is of course due to the Conservative Government’s failure to begin the lockdown early enough and like every other country where deaths are lower.

The new Scottish statistics will no doubt be useful but, of course, of particular value to Scottish media, which will report them crudely for maximum negativity of effect and to associate them with Scottish Government guidance or resource allocation. Watch Lisa Summers go.

These new statistics inflate the numbers by including those for whom covid-19 might have, based on a subjective evaluation, contributed to the death. We’ve been here before with BBC Scotland and pigeon droppings.

This is broader but it’s not more accurate.

Accepting these new figures, the death rate is 6.9% of those recorded.

Without the same increase in accuracy, the UK average is 11.1%.

14 thoughts on “These new figures are not ‘more accurate’ or a ‘truer picture’ they’re less so”

  2. John, are you not watching/listening to the Scottish Government daily briefings? Those were the words of Nicola Sturgeon – that the new stats were, unfortunately, ‘more accurate’.

    It’s not easy to do comparisons because the UK government is slow and inconsistent with giving out data, but you haven’t done your 8% of the population but… theme – from the travellingtabby coronavirus page, it shows that Scotland, as part of the UK has:

    8.2% share of the population,
    7.7% share of Covid-19 infections, but
    3.6% share of deaths

    Wales and NI seem to be doing a bit better than England too – England are definitely suffering the highest proportion of deaths unfortunately (in proportion to the number of infections)

    Did you see the good news of a 89-year old recovering from the Coronavirus? (Nicola Sturgeon mentioned it in her briefing too) She was treated at Ninewells hospital – top place!

    We should be getting data with age break-down and stuff as well soon.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    2. And be gentle with me. I’ve eaten something I shouldn’t have at my age – probably the innocent-sounding but deadly chickpeas.

      Aching all over but not in a rock’n’roll way and knackered after no sleep.

      Like

      Reply

      1. I am saying that your headline is misleading – makes it sound like the BBC made it up, when they were just repeating what they were told (along with no intelligent context of course) – or even that the FM was lying.

        But you are no well! So these faux pas can be made. Aye you have to watch those legumes and hippy foods as you age – they need to be prepared properly especially chickpeas. I find that I need to rinse lentils a million times after boiling to make them edible these days. Some cleansing bicarb of soda solution might do some good?

        And reduce stress by not watching the news!

        Like

        Reply

  4. Just been reading more from the National Records of Scotland (NRS) about death statistics.

    Source: https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files/statistics/vital-events/bases-on-which-figures-for-cod-can-be-produced.pdf

    “… figures for a particular cause of death can be produced on THREE BASES:

    • ‘UNDERLYING CAUSE’ – cases where it was the disease or injury which initiated the chain of morbid events leading directly to death, or was the accident/act which produced the fatal injury;

    • ‘CONTRIBUTORY FACTOR’’ – cases where it was not the underlying cause of death, but it did contribute to the occurrence of the death – e.g. it did not cause the death, but may have hastened its occurrence;

    • ‘ANY MENTION’ – i.e. whether it appeared to be the underlying cause of the death, or was just a factor which contributed to, or may have hastened, the occurrence of the death.”

    The same source adds : “Figures are normally provided on the basis of the ‘underlying cause’. Every death has just one ‘underlying cause’ code, and so is counted only once in figures which are produced on the ‘underlying cause’ basis.”

    “A death may have several other causes coded as contributory factors, so could be counted several times in figures which are produced on the ‘contributory factor’ or ‘any mention’ bases. For that reason, figures are normally provided on the basis of the ‘underlying cause’.”

    However, NRS is currently reporting the number of deaths where Coronavirus has been ‘MENTIONED’ in death registration certificates.

    Source: https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/news/2020/deaths-involving-covid-19-statistics-published-by-national-records-of-scotland

    “Between 30th March to 5th April, 282 deaths relating to COVID-19 have been registered”. And for context: “… the total number of deaths registered in Scotland from 30th March to 5th April  was 1,741. The average number of deaths registered in the same week over the last five years was 1,098.”

    The NRS Director of Statistical Services explains: “We have produced these statistics based on deaths involving COVID-19, so this includes any deaths where COVID-19 is mentioned on the death certificate, whether it is the underlying cause of death or a contributory cause and includes registered deaths resulting from suspected or probable COVID-19.”

    The same source adds: “Using this methodology means that our statistics will differ from the number of deaths released daily by HPS (Health Protection Scotland) which report on deaths with an associated positive test for COVID-19, and it is expected that NRS statistics will show a higher number of deaths. This is because NRS figures report on deaths involving confirmed and also suspected or probable cases of COVID-19.”

    So perhaps ‘accuracy’, as a strict statistical term, should be used with caution. This may be a more appropriate characterisation: the NRS data provide a better representation of the overall impact on mortality of the virus. However, the partitioning between ‘underlying cause’ and ‘contributory factor’ is still to be made public as far as I can see.

    Also, we will in time no doubt learn about ‘excess mortality’ i.e. a significant number of deaths reported OVER THAT EXPECTED for a given point in the year based on historical patterns.

    Like

    Reply

  5. John I agree with your take on the new Scot Gov figures. Our deaths are approx 1 /2 of England’s so why introduce an accounting method different from rest of UK that will put our death figures up.

    Only explanation I can conjure up is the FM is trying to frighten Scots into their houses, obeying the lockdown, which will eventually lead to a lower death tally.

    Is this something foisted on the FM of did she have to agree to if?

    Like

    Reply

    1. Clydebuilt, it’s to be consistent with the rest-of-the-world reporting, we can’t compare with countries unless we have similar reporting criteria, and we need to compare so that we know that the things we are doing are working. If they are going to plan ahead they need to determine what the best strategy will be – based on similar numbers for other countries (not England) that have been through the worst – it makes me feel more positive that they might be considering good protocols by looking at what has worked well in other places.

      It’s a good move, if you look beyond MSM headlines. In fact, this is the first indication I’ve seen from the FM that they MIGHT deviate from UK overlordship. (unlikely, but maybe)

      Like

      Reply

      1. Thanks Contrary . . . . Was that spelled out by Scot Gov. ? And is this how most other countries are deriving their death figures.
        Any references.

        Like

        Reply

      2. Well, I thought Nicola Sturgeon was fairly clear on it yesterday in her daily brief. I can’t find the articles I was reading yesterday and the day before and hmm, I’m not sure I’m quite accurate in saying it ties up with world wide stats, what I am reading today seems to want ‘confirmed’ cases to document – although they also have ‘total’ as well as ‘confirmed’ death stats – much of the needed stats are on breakdown of the groups (age etc). This is very informative on the different worldwide stats being collected:

        https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus

        Different countries are collecting different stats – that’s why Italy’s numbers were so shocking I think (though it was bad anyway) – and not reporting it in the same way.

        Did the scottish government need to update the recording method? Yes, probably to include for more detailed information primarily, but maybe not for recording every death as ‘due’ to coronavirus (because you could argue that death from no treatment because of the crisis is ‘due’ to coronavirus) – as long as the stats are recorded properly, and we know that the headline figures aren’t ‘confirmed’ cases, it should give a more realistic total. It does indicate we aren’t doing enough testing though!

        Like

        Reply

  6. ‘I am saying that your headline is misleading – makes it sound like the BBC made it up, when they were just repeating what they were told’

    She said that they were more accurate. She didn’t say that the FM said they were more accurate,

    Like

    Reply

    1. Nuance, yes, but maybe they are all in agreement? No it isn’t strictly accurate but it is consistent with worldwide reporting and beneficial for that reason. I’m just concerned that the news is already making people anxious, and they need things reported clearly so to reduce confusion, I’m also very concerned with the number of people unthinkingly supporting every little thing the Scottish gov’t does just because Nicola Sturgeon is in charge – that’s populism – things need to be debated and considered and a proportionate level of criticism applied if it’s needed (just because the MSM is hysterical doesn’t mean we should be hysterical in the opposite direction). I want the best for the Scottish people – we are taking the brunt of the responsibility for keeping ourselves safe and we are all doing the best we can in the main – I think we should demand the gov’t does its best too. The U.K. Gov’t will kill vast swathes of people with impunity, and whatever the Scottish gov’t can do to mitigate that is to all our benefit.

      Look at Sweden, widely criticised for their response, but they are following the same curve as China so far – and they may come out of this with a functioning economy – so people not dying of poverty afterwards – and having controlled the epidemic. Media outrage isn’t a reason not to follow a good model and keep our people safe (though Faeroes model looks best, bit risky going with the Swedish untested route). The U.K. Gov’t reponse is so badly shit (similar to other western countries, notably USA) we need something different.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a reply to Clydebuilt Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.