BMJ Open (Jan 2023)

Understanding COVID-19 reporting behaviour to support political decision-making: a retrospective cross-sectional study of COVID-19 data reported to WHO

  • Auss Abbood,
  • Alexander Ullrich,
  • Luisa A Denkel

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061717
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 1

Abstract

Read online

Objective Daily COVID-19 data reported by WHO may provide the basis for political ad hoc decisions including travel restrictions. Data reported by countries, however, are heterogeneous and metrics to evaluate its quality are scarce. In this work, we analysed COVID-19 case counts provided by WHO and developed tools to evaluate country-specific reporting behaviours.Methods In this retrospective cross-sectional study, COVID-19 data reported daily to WHO from 3 January 2020 until 14 June 2021 were analysed. We proposed the concepts of binary reporting rate and relative reporting behaviour and performed descriptive analyses for all countries with these metrics. We developed a score to evaluate the consistency of incidence and binary reporting rates. Further, we performed spectral clustering of the binary reporting rate and relative reporting behaviour to identify salient patterns in these metrics.Results Our final analysis included 222 countries and regions. Reporting scores varied between −0.17, indicating discrepancies between incidence and binary reporting rate, and 1.0 suggesting high consistency of these two metrics. Median reporting score for all countries was 0.71 (IQR 0.55–0.87). Descriptive analyses of the binary reporting rate and relative reporting behaviour showed constant reporting with a slight ‘weekend effect’ for most countries, while spectral clustering demonstrated that some countries had even more complex reporting patterns.Conclusion The majority of countries reported COVID-19 cases when they did have cases to report. The identification of a slight ‘weekend effect’ suggests that COVID-19 case counts reported in the middle of the week may represent the best data basis for political ad hoc decisions. A few countries, however, showed unusual or highly irregular reporting that might require more careful interpretation. Our score system and cluster analyses might be applied by epidemiologists advising policy makers to consider country-specific reporting behaviours in political ad hoc decisions.