UNASSIGNED: We did a systematic review of multiple papers on PubMed, Medline, Embase, MedRxiV pre print on excess mortality. Differentiation between model based estimated excess mortality and data based excess mortality was studied.
UNASSIGNED: All the studies showed that the excess mortality was to the tune of almost three times the official figures. The model based excess mortality assumptions showed higher deaths as compared to the data based one. However, there were a lot of discrepancies in the data provided by various states along with variations observed between the two waves as well. Health survey data suggested higher mortality rate as compared to data compiled from the civil registration system. Additionally, in the second wave, a small but a significant number of deaths occurred due to non availability of oxygen and beds in the hospitals.
UNASSIGNED: Official COVID-19 deaths have entirely failed to capture the scale of pandemic excess mortality in India. If most excess deaths were, indeed, from COVID-19 then under ascertainment of COVID-19 deaths has been high, with around 8-10 excess deaths for every recorded COVID-19 death.
UNASSIGNED:我们对PubMed上的多篇论文进行了系统的回顾,Medline,Embase,MedRxiV预打印超额死亡率。研究了基于模型的估计超额死亡率和基于数据的超额死亡率之间的区别。
UNASSIGNED:所有研究表明,超额死亡率几乎是官方数字的三倍。与基于数据的模型相比,基于模型的超额死亡率假设显示出更高的死亡率。然而,各个州提供的数据存在很大差异,并且两个波之间也存在差异。健康调查数据表明,与民事登记系统汇编的数据相比,死亡率更高。此外,在第二波浪潮中,由于医院没有氧气和病床,因此死亡人数很少,但数量很大。
UNASSIGNED:官方COVID-19死亡完全未能捕捉到印度大流行超额死亡率的规模。如果大多数超额死亡是,的确,从COVID-19开始,在确定的COVID-19死亡人数很高,每记录的COVID-19死亡人数约为8-10人。