Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Disparity in the quality of COVID-19 data reporting across India

View through CrossRef
Abstract Background Transparent and accessible reporting of COVID-19 data is critical for public health efforts. Each Indian state has its own mechanism for reporting COVID-19 data, and the quality of their reporting has not been systematically evaluated. We present a comprehensive assessment of the quality of COVID-19 data reporting done by the Indian state governments between 19 May and 1 June, 2020. Methods We designed a semi-quantitative framework with 45 indicators to assess the quality of COVID-19 data reporting. The framework captures four key aspects of public health data reporting – availability, accessibility, granularity, and privacy. We used this framework to calculate a COVID-19 Data Reporting Score (CDRS, ranging from 0–1) for each state. Results Our results indicate a large disparity in the quality of COVID-19 data reporting across India. CDRS varies from 0.61 (good) in Karnataka to 0.0 (poor) in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, with a median value of 0.26. Ten states do not report data stratified by age, gender, comorbidities or districts. Only ten states provide trend graphics for COVID-19 data. In addition, we identify that Punjab and Chandigarh compromised the privacy of individuals under quarantine by publicly releasing their personally identifiable information. The CDRS is positively associated with the state’s sustainable development index for good health and well-being (Pearson correlation: r=0.630, p=0.0003). Conclusions Our assessment informs the public health efforts in India and serves as a guideline for pandemic data reporting. The disparity in CDRS highlights three important findings at the national, state, and individual level. At the national level, it shows the lack of a unified framework for reporting COVID-19 data in India, and highlights the need for a central agency to monitor or audit the quality of data reporting done by the states. Without a unified framework, it is difficult to aggregate the data from different states, gain insights, and coordinate an effective nationwide response to the pandemic. Moreover, it reflects the inadequacy in coordination or sharing of resources among the states. The disparate reporting score also reflects inequality in individual access to public health information and privacy protection based on the state of residence.
Title: Disparity in the quality of COVID-19 data reporting across India
Description:
Abstract Background Transparent and accessible reporting of COVID-19 data is critical for public health efforts.
Each Indian state has its own mechanism for reporting COVID-19 data, and the quality of their reporting has not been systematically evaluated.
We present a comprehensive assessment of the quality of COVID-19 data reporting done by the Indian state governments between 19 May and 1 June, 2020.
Methods We designed a semi-quantitative framework with 45 indicators to assess the quality of COVID-19 data reporting.
The framework captures four key aspects of public health data reporting – availability, accessibility, granularity, and privacy.
We used this framework to calculate a COVID-19 Data Reporting Score (CDRS, ranging from 0–1) for each state.
Results Our results indicate a large disparity in the quality of COVID-19 data reporting across India.
CDRS varies from 0.
61 (good) in Karnataka to 0.
0 (poor) in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, with a median value of 0.
26.
Ten states do not report data stratified by age, gender, comorbidities or districts.
Only ten states provide trend graphics for COVID-19 data.
In addition, we identify that Punjab and Chandigarh compromised the privacy of individuals under quarantine by publicly releasing their personally identifiable information.
The CDRS is positively associated with the state’s sustainable development index for good health and well-being (Pearson correlation: r=0.
630, p=0.
0003).
Conclusions Our assessment informs the public health efforts in India and serves as a guideline for pandemic data reporting.
The disparity in CDRS highlights three important findings at the national, state, and individual level.
At the national level, it shows the lack of a unified framework for reporting COVID-19 data in India, and highlights the need for a central agency to monitor or audit the quality of data reporting done by the states.
Without a unified framework, it is difficult to aggregate the data from different states, gain insights, and coordinate an effective nationwide response to the pandemic.
Moreover, it reflects the inadequacy in coordination or sharing of resources among the states.
The disparate reporting score also reflects inequality in individual access to public health information and privacy protection based on the state of residence.

Related Results

Disparity in the quality of COVID-19 data reporting across India
Disparity in the quality of COVID-19 data reporting across India
AbstractBackgroundTransparent and accessible reporting of COVID-19 data is critical for public health efforts. Each state and union territory (UT) of India has its own mechanism fo...
Why Do Indians Experience Less Happiness Than Pakistanis?
Why Do Indians Experience Less Happiness Than Pakistanis?
This study explores the enigma of happiness inequality between India and Pakistan, despite India’s economic prowess. Employing inequality regression models, the study pinpoints cru...
Recurrence Possibility of COVID-19 in India
Recurrence Possibility of COVID-19 in India
Although nationwide lockdown was imposed in India amid COVID-19 outbreak since March 24, 2020, the COVID-19 infection is increasing day-by-day. India became world’s second most aff...
Linton Scale Illusion
Linton Scale Illusion
We present a new illusion that challenges our understanding of visual scale. Since Helmholtz’s ‘telestereoscope’ (1857), we’ve known that stereo vision governs visual scale, turnin...
Visual Scale is Governed by Horizontal Disparities: Linton Scale Illusion
Visual Scale is Governed by Horizontal Disparities: Linton Scale Illusion
We present a new illusion that challenges our understanding of visual scale. Since Helmholtz’s ‘telestereoscope’ (1857), we’ve known that stereo vision governs visual scale, turnin...
Visual Scale is Governed by Horizontal Disparities: Linton Scale Illusion
Visual Scale is Governed by Horizontal Disparities: Linton Scale Illusion
We present a new illusion that challenges our understanding of visual scale. Since Helmholtz’s ‘telestereoscope’ (1857), we’ve known that stereo vision governs visual scale, turnin...
Using Primary Care Text Data and Natural Language Processing to Monitor COVID-19 in Toronto, Canada
Using Primary Care Text Data and Natural Language Processing to Monitor COVID-19 in Toronto, Canada
AbstractObjectiveTo investigate whether a rule-based natural language processing (NLP) system, applied to primary care clinical text data, can be used to monitor COVID-19 viral act...
Disparity sensitivity and binocular integration in mouse visual cortex areas
Disparity sensitivity and binocular integration in mouse visual cortex areas
AbstractBinocular disparity, the difference between the two eyes’ images, is a powerful cue to generate the three-dimensional depth percept known as stereopsis. In primates, binocu...

Back to Top