Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34007090›Full record

ArticleSocio-economic planning sciences2021

The socio-economic determinants of COVID-19: A spatial analysis of German county level data.

Andree Ehlert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Socio-economic planning sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The trade-off between health system resiliency and efficiency: evidence from COVID-19 in European regions.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Exploring the Spatial Relative Risk of COVID-19 in Berlin-Neukölln.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Andree EhlertHarz University of Applied Sciences, Friedrichstr. 57-59, 38855 Wernigerode, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study explores the association of socioeconomic, demographic, and health-related variables at the regional level with COVID-19 related cases and deaths in Germany during the so-called first wave through mid-June 2020. Multivariate spatial models include the 401 counties in Germany to account for regional interrelations and possible spillover effects. The case and death numbers are, for example, significantly positively associated with early cases from the beginning of the epidemic, the average age, the population density and the share of people employed in elderly care. By contrast, they are significantly negatively associated with the share of schoolchildren and children in day care as well as physician density. In addition, significant spillover effects on the case numbers of neighbouring regions were identified for certain variables, with a different sign than the overall effects, giving rise to further future analyses of the regional mechanisms of action of COVID-19 infection. The results complement the knowledge about COVID-19 infection beyond the clinical risk factors discussed so far by a socio-economic perspective at the ecological level.

Indexed as

County levelCOVID-19GermanySocial determinantsSocio-economicSpatial analysisSpillover

Identifiers

PMID34007090
PMCPMC8120786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.