ArticleBMC public health2021
Association of COVID-19 mortality with politics and on-demand testing in 217 U.S. counties.
Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in cardiovascular mortality (1999-2023) in the United States: an analysis of underlying causes of death using the CDC WONDER database.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious research found increased COVID-19 spread associated with politics and on-demand testing but not in the same study. The objective of this study is to estimate the contribution of each corrected for the other and a variety of known risk factors.
methodsUsing data from 217 U.S. counties of more than 50,000 population where testing data were available in April, 2021, the associations of COVID-19 deaths with politics, testing and other risk factors were examined by Poisson and least squares regression.
resultsStatistical controls for 15 risk factors failed to eliminate the association of COVID mortality risk with percent of vote for Donald Trump in 2016 or negative tests per population. Each is independently predictive of increased mortality.
conclusionApparently, many people who test negative for the SARS-CoV-2 virus engage in activities that increase their risk, a problem likely to increase with the availability of home tests. There is no association of negative tests with the Trump vote but, according to polling data, Trump voters' past resistance to public health recommendations has been extended to resistance to being vaccinated, threatening the goal of herd immunity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.