Back

Ethnics and economics in COVID-19: Meta-regression of data from countries in the New York metropolitan area

Takagi, H.; Kuno, T.; Yokoyama, Y.; Ueyama, H.; Matsushiro, T.; Hari, Y.; Ando, T.

2020-05-24 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.05.22.20110791 medRxiv
Show abstract

Ethnics and economics may affect prevalence and case fatality of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To determine whether COVID-19 prevalence and fatality are modulated by ethnics and economics, meta-regression of data from the countries in the New York metropolitan area were herein conducted. We selected 31 countries in the New York metropolitan area. 1) Prevalence and case-fatality rates of confirmed COVID-19 cases on May 20, 2020 and 2) income and poverty estimates were obtained in each country. We performed random-effects meta-regression using OpenMetaAnalys. The covariates included 1) black (%), 2) Hispanic or Latino (%), 3) poverty rates (%), and 4) median household income ($). Statistically significant (P < .05) covariates in the univariable model were together entered into the multivariable model. A slope (coefficient) of the univariable meta-regression line for COVID-19 prevalence was not significant for household income (P = .639), whereas the coefficient was significantly positive for black (coefficient, 0.021; P = .015), Hispanic/Latino (0.033; P < .001), and poverty (0.039; P = .02), which indicated that COVID-19 prevalence increased significantly as black, Hispanic/Latino, and poverty increased. The multivariable model revealed that the slope was significantly positive for only Hispanic/Latino (P < .001). The coefficient in the univariable model for COVID-19 fatality, however, was not significant for all the covariate. In conclusion, black, Hispanic/Latino, and poverty (not household income), especially Hispanic/Latino independently, may be associated with COVID-19 prevalence. There may be no association of black, Hispanic/Latino, poverty, and household income with COVID-19 fatality.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.