Dataset Information

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

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.

SUBMITTER: Vasudevan V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8223181 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a deep global impact, not only from a social and economic perspective, but also with regard to human health and the environment. To restrict transmission of the virus, the Indian government enforced a complete nationwide lockdown except for essential services and supplies in phases from 25 March to 31 May 2020. Ambient air quality in and around New Delhi, one of the most polluted cities of world, was also impacted during this period.ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to assess and understand the impact of four different lockdown phases (LD1, LD2, LD3 and LD4) on five air pollutants (particulate matter (PM) PM2.5, PM10, nitrogen oxide (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2) and ozone (O3)) compared to before lockdown (BLD) at 13 air monitoring stations in and around New Delhi.MethodsSecondary data on five criteria pollutants for 13 monitoring stations in and around New Delhi for the period 1 March to 31 May 2020 was accessed from the Central Pollution Control Bard, New Delhi. Data were statistically analyzed across lockdown phases, meteorological variables, and prevailing air sources around the monitoring stations.ResultsPollutant concentrations decreased during LD1 compared to BLD except for O3 at all stations. PM2.5 and PM10 remained either close to or higher than the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) due to prevailing high-speed winds. During lockdown phases, NO2 decreased, whereas O3 consistently increased at all stations. This was a paradoxical situation as O3 is formed via photochemical reactions among NOx and volatile organic compounds. Principal component analysis (PCA) extracted two principal components (PC1 and PC2) which explained up to 80% of cumulative variance in data. PM2.5, PM10 and NO2 were associated with PC1, whereas PC2 had loadings of either O3 only or O3 and SO2 depending upon monitoring station.ConclusionsThe present study found that air pollutants decreased during lockdown phases, but these decreases were specific to the site(s) and pollutant(s). The decrease in pollutant concentrations during lockdown could not be attributed completely to lockdown conditions as the planetary boundary layer increased two-fold during lockdown compared to the BLD phase. Such restrictions could be applied in the future to control air pollution but should be approached with caution.Competing interestsThe authors declare no competing financial interests.