COVID-19 Variability Within European Countries Sourced From ECDC Data. Is Variability Explained by Specific Country Policies?

COVID-19 European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) epidemiology health policy variability

Journal

Frontiers in public health
ISSN: 2296-2565
Titre abrégé: Front Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101616579

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2021
Historique:
received: 06 07 2021
accepted: 28 12 2021
entrez: 4 2 2022
pubmed: 5 2 2022
medline: 9 2 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Europe has had a large variability in COVID-19 incidence between and within countries, particularly after June 2020. We aim to assess the variability between European countries and regions located in a given country. We used ECDC information including countries having 7 regions or more. The metric used to assess the regional variability within a country was the intercuartilic range in a weekly basis for 32 weeks between June 29 The variability between and within countries was large. Slovenia, Spain and Portugal have the greatest variability. Spain and Slovenia held also the top three places for the greatest number of weeks (Spain for 19 weeks and Slovenia for 10) with the highest variability. For variability among the incidence curves across the 32-week period, Slovenia, Portugal and Spain ranked first in functional variability, when all the regions were analysed but also when the island regions were excluded. These differences might be due to how countries tackled the epidemiological situation. The persistent variability in COVID-19 incidence between regions of a given country suggests that governmental action may have an important role in applying epidemiological control measures.

Sections du résumé

Background
Europe has had a large variability in COVID-19 incidence between and within countries, particularly after June 2020. We aim to assess the variability between European countries and regions located in a given country.
Methods
We used ECDC information including countries having 7 regions or more. The metric used to assess the regional variability within a country was the intercuartilic range in a weekly basis for 32 weeks between June 29
Results
The variability between and within countries was large. Slovenia, Spain and Portugal have the greatest variability. Spain and Slovenia held also the top three places for the greatest number of weeks (Spain for 19 weeks and Slovenia for 10) with the highest variability. For variability among the incidence curves across the 32-week period, Slovenia, Portugal and Spain ranked first in functional variability, when all the regions were analysed but also when the island regions were excluded.
Conclusions
These differences might be due to how countries tackled the epidemiological situation. The persistent variability in COVID-19 incidence between regions of a given country suggests that governmental action may have an important role in applying epidemiological control measures.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35118037
doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.737133
pmc: PMC8805795
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

737133

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Ruano-Ravina, López-Vizcaíno, Candal-Pedreira, Santiago-Pérez and Pérez-Ríos.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Dec 18;17(24):
pubmed: 33353158
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jul 22;22(7):e19904
pubmed: 32658858
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 May 5;117(18):9696-9698
pubmed: 32300018
Data Brief. 2020 Sep 05;32:106276
pubmed: 32984469
Lancet. 2020 Nov 7;396(10261):1525-1534
pubmed: 32979936
Eur J Public Health. 2021 Feb 1;31(1):12-16
pubmed: 33479720
Health Aff (Millwood). 2020 Jul;39(7):1237-1246
pubmed: 32407171
Heliyon. 2021 Feb;7(2):e06260
pubmed: 33594343
Arch Bronconeumol. 2021 Apr;57:21-27
pubmed: 34629639
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2021 Aug;28(30):40322-40328
pubmed: 32989697
Sci Rep. 2020 Nov 3;10(1):18909
pubmed: 33144595
QJM. 2020 Jun 1;113(6):391-392
pubmed: 32311049
Sustain Cities Soc. 2020 Nov;62:102418
pubmed: 32834939
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Dec 16;17(24):
pubmed: 33339119
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2020 Aug;18(4):509-517
pubmed: 32495067

Auteurs

Alberto Ruano-Ravina (A)

Área de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública, CIBERESP, Madrid, Spain.
Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

Esther López-Vizcaíno (E)

Servicio de Difusión e Información, Instituto Galego de Estadística, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

Cristina Candal-Pedreira (C)

Área de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

María Isolina Santiago-Pérez (MI)

Área de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Servicio de Epidemiología, Dirección General de Salud Pública, Consellería de Sanidade, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

Mónica Pérez-Ríos (M)

Área de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública, CIBERESP, Madrid, Spain.
Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH