MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3175386379 · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(21)00247-3

Sex-disaggregated data is reported by Public Health England – Authors' reply

2021· letter· en· W3175386379 sur OpenAlexaff
Sarah Hawkes, Sonja Tanaka, Sylvia Kiwuwa-Muyingo, Kent Buse, Anna Purdie

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Lancet Global Health · 2021
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueHealthcare Systems and Challenges
Établissements canadiensCentre for Global Health Research
Organismes subventionnairesBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Mots-clésPublic healthJournal of Public HealthMedicineDemographyData scienceGeographyComputer scienceSociologyHealth policyInternational healthPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

We are pleased that Public Health England, in their response to our Correspondence,1Hawkes S Tanaka S Pantazis A et al.Recorded but not revealed: exploring the relationship between sex and gender, country income level, and COVID-19.Lancet Glob Health. 2021; 9: e751-e752Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar have emphasised the importance of sex and gender in the COVID-19 pandemic. We are aware of the sex-disaggregated data produced by Public Health England, which is used in our COVID-19 sex-disaggregated data tracker.2Global Health 50/50 The COVID-19 sex-disaggregated data tracker.https://globalhealth5050.org/the-sex-gender-and-covid-19-project/Date accessed: April 30, 2021Google Scholar While recognising the availability of the data included in our tracker, our Correspondence1Hawkes S Tanaka S Pantazis A et al.Recorded but not revealed: exploring the relationship between sex and gender, country income level, and COVID-19.Lancet Glob Health. 2021; 9: e751-e752Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar highlighted issues regarding the regularity and accessibility of Public Health England reporting of sex-disaggregated data. The statement in our Correspondence, which we affirm, was informed by what were labelled as official Public Health England responses to our emails, as well as more than a year of experience searching for and collecting sex-disaggregated data from the Public Health England website. Public reporting of sex-disaggregated data from England did not appear until the end of April, 2020, months into the COVID-19 pandemic, and data were provided in a format that was time-consuming to extract.3Public Health EnglandNational COVID-19 Surveillance Reports.https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-covid-19-surveillance-reportsDate accessed: April 30, 2021Google Scholar COVID-19 data were subsequently moved to a new reporting format,4Public Health EnglandNational flu and COVID-19 surveillance reports.https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-flu-and-covid-19-surveillance-reportsDate accessed: April 30, 2021Google Scholar which at first no longer included any extractable sex-disaggregated death data. Email correspondence in November, 2020, with members of the Public Health England influenza team who were responsible for these reports informed us that a decision had been made to stop reporting sex-disaggregated death data. Therefore, for a period of months, we could not report sex-disaggregated COVID-19 death data from England. We later wrote to the official email address provided for the Government's COVID-19 dashboard with a request that additional sex-disaggregated data be included. However, we were informed that such data were not included because sex “does not appear to be an important risk factor for COVID”. We wrote back to this email but have not received a response. The example of England referenced in our Correspondence1Hawkes S Tanaka S Pantazis A et al.Recorded but not revealed: exploring the relationship between sex and gender, country income level, and COVID-19.Lancet Glob Health. 2021; 9: e751-e752Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar illustrates an important and recurring issue we have seen globally concerning the consistent reporting sex-disaggregated data in the pandemic, including by countries with the resources to do so. This is illustrative of a larger problem across the health and medical sector in which sex and gender are frequently overlooked or ignored.5Gupta GR, Oomman N, Grown C, et al. Gender equality and gender norms: framing the opportunities for health. Lancet 393: 2550–62.Google Scholar We are grateful to Public Health England for taking the time to respond to our Correspondence and for their engagement over the preceding and exceedingly challenging months. As an accountability mechanism, our objective is not to criticise national responses, but to raise national and global awareness of the importance of sex and gender in designing effective and equitable pandemic responses that reach everyone. We are pleased that Public Health England is rising to this challenge. SH reports grants and personal fees from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation during the conduct of the study. SK-M, KB, and AP report grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation during the conduct of the study. ST declares no competing interests. Recorded but not revealed: exploring the relationship between sex and gender, country income level, and COVID-19In 2020 we witnessed a seeming exponential spread of information about COVID-19. From understanding the pathogen to understanding its effect on populations, we have a wealth of evidence for decision making in pandemic control. Nonetheless, there remain some fundamental areas of investigation and response for which evidence remains oddly and inconsistently absent. The role of sex and gender in understanding the testing-to-outcome pathway of the pandemic is one such area. Full-Text PDF Open AccessSex-disaggregated data is reported by Public Health EnglandWe agree with Sarah Hawkes and colleagues (June, 2021)1 who state that reporting COVID-19 outcomes by sex is an important component of global pandemic surveillance and monitoring of inequalities, and we congratulate them on establishing the COVID-19 sex-disaggregated data tracker. In June, 2020, a comprehensive Public Health England report showed that sex was a risk factor for COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation (including critical care and lower level of care), death, and excess mortality.2 In an article published in 2021, we confirmed that male sex was a risk factor for poorer outcomes from COVID-19 and considered the implications for vaccination prioritisation. Full-Text PDF Open Access

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,018
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesIntégrité de la recherche
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,048
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0180,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0040,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0030,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,011
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,387
Tête enseignante GPT0,503
Écart entre enseignants0,116 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Lancet Global HealthMême sujetHealthcare Systems and ChallengesTravaux en français237 207