Global ecological analysis of COVID-19 mortality and comparison between “the East” and “the West”
Open accessAbstract
Although SARS-CoV-2 was first reported in China and neighbouring countries, the pandemic quickly spread around the globe. This paper explores national drivers of the pandemic and the radically different epidemiology and response in the West and in the East. We studied coronavirus disease (COVID-19) mortality until 31st December 2020, using an ecological study design, considering baseline characteristics and responses that might account for the uneven impact of the pandemic. A multivariable regression model was developed to explore key determinants. Key variables in the West were contrasted with those in the East, and speed of response was examined. Worldwide, 2.24 million COVID-19 deaths were documented in 2020. Western countries reported a median mortality 114 times that of the East (684 vs. 6.0 per million). Significant correlates of mortality in countries with at least 1 million population were median age, obesity prevalence, and democracy index; political stability and experience of SARS in 2002-2003 were protective; health system variables and income inequality were not associated. Outputs of the model were consistent when adjusted for stringency index, timeliness of stay-at-home requirements, and geographical autocorrelation. The West experiences a much higher COVID-19 mortality than the East. Despite structural advantages in the West, delays in national responses early on resulted in a loss of control over the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Although the early success of the East was sustained in the second half of 2020, the region remains extremely vulnerable to COVID-19 until enough people are immunized.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Pablos Mendez et al and Jamison and Wu point to an East-West divide in 2020, with a factor of up to 100 to 1 separating countries.
“Pablos Mendez et al and Jamison and Wu point to an “East-West divide” in 2020,183,184, with a factor of up to 100 to 1 separating countries.”
From Global health 2050: the path to halving premature death by mid-century (2024) · cites this paper as [184]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
COVID-19 and the Swedish enigma
Claeson, M., & Hanson, S. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)32750-1 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Global health 2050: the path to halving premature death by mid-century
Jamison, D. T., Summers, L. H., Chang, A. Y., Karlsson, O., Mao, W., Norheim, O. F., Ogbuoji, O., Schäferhoff, M., Watkins, D., Adeyi, O., et al. (2024) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(24)01439-9 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
- Authors
- Pablos-Méndez, A., Villa, S., Monti, M. C., Raviglione, M. C., Tabish, H. B., Evans, T. G., & Cash, R. A.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
- University of Milan (IT)
- University of Pavia (IT)
- William Paterson University (US)
- McGill University (CA)
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Villa, Simone
- ORCID
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2022-03-28
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5272-5272
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8959561
- OpenAlex
- W4220761916
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 1.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- China Medical Board
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Legal, Health, Environmental and COVID-19 Challenges
- Keywords
- COVID-19 mortality, SARS-CoV-2, East-West comparison, mortality determinants, obesity prevalence, median age, democracy index, political stability, health care system, income inequality, stay-at-home orders, stringency index
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Humans, Income, Pandemics, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review