Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to the direct health impact of COVID-19 in India, 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract COVID-19 has affected all countries. Its containment represents a unique challenge for India due to a large population (>1.38 billion) across a wide range of population densities. Assessment of the COVID-19 disease burden is required to put the disease impact into context and support future pandemic policy development. Here, we present the national-level burden of COVID-19 in India in 2020 that accounts for differences across urban and rural regions and across age groups. Disability-adjusted life years (DALY) due to COVID-19 were estimated in the Indian population in 2020, comprised of years of life lost (YLL) and years lived with disability (YLD). Scenario analyses were conducted to account for excess deaths not recorded in the official data and for reported COVID-19 deaths. The direct impact of COVID-19 in 2020 in India was responsible for 14,106,060 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 14,030,129–14,213,231) DALYs, consisting of 99.2% (95% UI 98.47–99.64%) YLLs and 0.80% (95% UI 0.36–1.53) YLDs. DALYs were higher in urban (56%; 95% UI 56–57%) than rural areas (44%; 95% UI 43.4–43.6) and in males (64%) than females (36%). In absolute terms, the highest DALYs occurred in the 51–60-year-old age group (28%) but the highest DALYs per 100,000 persons were estimated for the 71-80 year old age group (5,481; 95% UI 5,464–5,500 years). There were 4,823,791 (95% UI 4,760,908–4,924,307) DALYs after considering reported COVID-19 deaths only. The DALY estimations have direct and immediate implications not only for public policy in India, but also internationally given that India represents one sixth of the world’s population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".