Concordance between COVID-19 mortality statistics derived from clinical audit and death certificates in Östergötland county, Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: Despite early notions that correct attribution of deaths caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection is critical to the understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic, three years later, the accuracy of COVID-19 death counts is still contested. We aimed to compare official death statistics with cause-of-death assessments made in a clinical audit routine by experienced physicians having access to the full medical record. STUDY DESIGN: Health service quality evaluation. METHODS: In Östergötland county (pop. 465,000), Sweden, a clinical audit team assessed from the start of the pandemic the cause of death in individuals having deceased after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. We estimated the concordance between official data on COVID-19 deaths and data from the clinical audit using correlations (r) between the cause-of-death categories and discrepancies between the absolute numbers of categorised deaths. RESULTS: The concordance between the data sources was poor regarding whether COVID-19 was the underlying or a contributing cause of death. Grouping of the causes increased the correlations to acceptable strength. Also including deaths implicated by a positive SARS-CoV-2 test in the clinical categorisation of COVID-19 deaths reduced the difference in absolute number of deaths; with these modifications, the concordance was acceptable before the COVID-19 vaccination program was initiated (r = 0.97; symmetric mean absolute percentage error (SMAPE) = 19%), while a difference in the absolute numbers of deaths remained in the vaccination period (r = 0.94; SMAPE = 35%). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that carefulness is warranted when COVID-19 death statistics are used in health service planning and resonates a need for further research on cause-of-death recording methodologies.

[Places of death of COVID-19 patients: an observational study based on evaluated death certificates from the city of Muenster, Germany (2021)]. / Sterbeorte von COVID-19-Patienten: eine Observationsstudie auf Grundlage ausgewerteter Todesbescheinigungen der Stadt Münster (2021).

INTRODUCTION: The places of death of COVID-19 patients have so far hardly been investigated in Germany. METHODS: In a places of death study in Westphalia (Germany), statistical evaluations were carried out in the city of Muenster on the basis of all death certificates from 2021. Persons who had died with or from a COVID-19 infection were identified by medical information on cause of death and analyzed with descriptive statistical methods using SPSS. RESULTS: A total of 4044 death certificates were evaluated, and 182 deceased COVID-19 patients were identified (4.5%). In 159 infected patients (3.9%), the viral infection was fatal, whereby the distribution of places of death was as follows: 88.1% in hospital (57.2% in the intensive care unit; 0.0% in the palliative care unit), 0.0% in hospice, 10.7% in nursing homes, 1.3% at home, and 0.0% in other places. All infected patients < 60 years and 75.4% of elderly patients ≥ 80 years died in hospital. Only two COVID-19 patients, both over 80 years old, died at home. COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes (17) affected mostly elderly female residents. Ten of these residents had received end-of-life care from a specialized outpatient palliative care team. DISCUSSION: The majority of COVID-19 patients died in hospital. This can be explained by the rapid course of the disease with a high symptom burden and the frequent young age of the patients. Inpatient nursing facilities played a certain role as a place of death in local outbreaks. COVID-19 patients rarely died at home. Infection control measures may be one reason why no patients died in hospices or palliative care units.

Flaws and uncertainties in pandemic global excess death calculations.

Several teams have been publishing global estimates of excess deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we examine potential flaws and underappreciated sources of uncertainty in global excess death calculations. Adjusting for changing population age structure is essential. Otherwise, excess deaths are markedly overestimated in countries with increasingly aging populations. Adjusting for changes in other high-risk indicators, such as residence in long-term facilities, may also make a difference. Death registration is highly incomplete in most countries; completeness corrections should allow for substantial uncertainty and consider that completeness may have changed during pandemic years. Excess death estimates have high sensitivity to modelling choice. Therefore different options should be considered and the full range of results should be shown for different choices of pre-pandemic reference periods and imposed models. Any post-modelling corrections in specific countries should be guided by pre-specified rules. Modelling of all-cause mortality (ACM) in countries that have ACM data and extrapolating these models to other countries is precarious; models may lack transportability. Existing global excess death estimates underestimate the overall uncertainty that is multiplicative across diverse sources of uncertainty. Informative excess death estimates require risk stratification, including age groups and ethnic/racial strata. Data to-date suggest a death deficit among children during the pandemic and marked socioeconomic differences in deaths, widening inequalities. Finally, causal explanations require great caution in disentangling SARS-CoV-2 deaths, indirect pandemic effects and effects from measures taken. We conclude that excess deaths have many uncertainties, but globally deaths from SARS-CoV-2 may be the minority of calculated excess deaths.

Increased deaths from fungal infections during the COVID-19 pandemic-National Vital Statistics System, United States, January 2020-December 2021.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-associated fungal infections cause severe illness, but comprehensive data on disease burden are lacking. We analyzed US National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) data to characterize disease burden, temporal trends, and demographic characteristics of persons dying from fungal infections during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using NVSS's January 2018-December 2021 Multiple Cause of Death Database, we examined numbers and age-adjusted rates (per 100,000 population) of fungal deaths by fungal pathogen, COVID-19 association, demographic characteristics, and year. RESULTS: Numbers and age-adjusted rates of fungal deaths increased from 2019 (n = 4,833, rate 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-1.3) to 2021 (n = 7,199, rate: 1.8, 95% CI = 1.8-1.8); of 13,121 fungal deaths during 2020-2021, 2,868 (21.9%) were COVID-19-associated. Compared with non-COVID-19-associated fungal deaths (n = 10,253), COVID-19-associated fungal deaths more frequently involved Candida (n = 776 [27.1%] versus n = 2,432 [23.7%]) and Aspergillus (n = 668 [23.3%] versus n = 1,486 [14.5%]) and less frequently involved other specific fungal pathogens. Fungal death rates were generally highest in non-White and non-Asian populations. Death rates from Aspergillus infections were approximately two times higher in the Pacific US census division compared with most other divisions. CONCLUSIONS: Fungal deaths increased during 2020-2021 compared with previous years, primarily driven by COVID-19-associated fungal deaths, particularly those involving Aspergillus and Candida. Our findings may inform efforts to prevent, identify, and treat severe fungal infections in COVID-19 patients, especially in certain racial/ethnic groups and geographic areas.

Physicians' Perceptions as Predictors of the Future Use of the National Death Information System in Peru: Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: A computer application called the National Death Information System (SINADEF) was implemented in Peru so that physicians can prepare death certificates in electronic format and the information is available online. In 2018, only half of the estimated deaths in Peru were certified using SINADEF. When a death is certified in paper format, the probability being entered in the mortality database decreases. It is important to know, from the user's perspective, the factors that can influence the successful implementation of SINADEF. SINADEF can only be successfully implemented if it is known whether physicians believe that it is useful and easy to operate. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the perceptions of physicians and other factors as predictors of their behavioral intention to use SINADEF to certify a death. METHODS: This study had an observational, cross-sectional design. A survey was provided to physicians working in Peru, who used SINADEF to certify a death for a period of 12 months, starting in November 2019. A questionnaire was adapted based on the Technology Acceptance Model. The questions measured the dimensions of subjective norm, image, job relevance, output quality, demonstrability of results, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and behavioral intention to use. Chi-square and logistic regression tests were used in the analysis, and a confidence level of 95% was chosen to support a significant association. RESULTS: In this study, 272 physicians responded to the survey; 184 (67.6%) were men and the average age was 45.3 (SD 10.1) years. The age range was 24 to 73 years. In the bivariate analysis, the intention to use SINADEF was found to be associated with (1) perceived usefulness, expressed as "using SINADEF avoids falsifying a death certificate" (P<.001), "using SINADEF reduces the risk of errors" (P<.001), and "using SINADEF allows for filling out a certificate in less time" (P<.001); and (2) perceived ease of use, expressed as "I think SINADEF is easy to use" (P<.001). In the logistic regression, perceived usefulness (odds ratio [OR] 8.5, 95% CI 2.2-32.3; P=.002), perceived ease of use (OR 10.1, 95% CI 2.4-41.8; P=.001), and training in filling out death certificates (OR 8.3, 95% CI 1.6-42.8; P=.01) were found to be predictors of the behavioral intention to use SINADEF. CONCLUSIONS: The behavioral intention to use SINADEF was related to the perception that it is an easy-to-use system, the belief that it improves the performance of physicians in carrying out the task at hand, and with training in filling out death certificates.

Quality of death certificates completion for COVID-19 cases in the southeast of Iran: A cross-sectional study.

Background and Aim: Death certificate (DC) data provides a basis for public health policies and statistics and contributes to the evaluation of a pandemic's evolution. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of the COVID-19-related DC completion. Methods: A descriptive-analytical study was conducted to review a total of 339 medical records and DCs issued for COVID-19 cases from February 20 to September 21, 2020. A univariate analysis (χ 2 as an unadjusted analysis) was performed, and multiple logistic regression models (odd ratio [OR] and 95% confidence interval [CI] as adjusted analyses) were used to evaluate the associations between variables. Results: Errors in DCs were classified as major and minor. All of the 339 examined DCs were erroneous; more than half of DCs (57.8%) had at least one major error; all of them had at least one minor error. Improper sequencing (49.3%), unacceptable underlying causes of death (UCOD) (33.3%), recording more than one cause per line (20.1%), listing general conditions instead of specific terms (11.2%), illegible handwriting (8.3%), competing causes (6.2%), and mechanisms (3.8%) were most common major errors, respectively. Absence of time interval (100%), listing mechanism allying with UCOD (51.6%), using abbreviations (45.4%), missing major comorbidities (16.5%), and listing major comorbidities in part I (16.5%) were most common minor errors, respectively. Conclusion: The rate of both major and minor errors was high. Using automated tools for recording and selecting death cause(s), promoting certifiers' skills on DC completion, and applying quality control mechanisms in DC documentation can improve death data and statistics.

COVID-19 mortality burden and comorbidity patterns among decedents with and without intellectual and developmental disability in the US.

BACKGROUND: While there is ample evidence of increased COVID-19 mortality risk among people with intellectual and developmental disability (IDD), research has not documented whether this higher risk resulted in increased COVID-19 mortality burden in the US or whether comorbidity patterns among COVID-19 deaths are similar or distinct for people with IDD. OBJECTIVE: To determine the differences in COVID-19 mortality burden between decedents with and without IDD during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: This study uses 2020 US death certificate data to compare COVID-19 mortality burden and comorbidity patterns among decedents with and without IDD. RESULTS: COVID-19 was the leading cause of death among decedents with IDD in 2020, compared with the 3rd leading cause among decedents without IDD. The proportion of deaths from COVID-19 was also higher for decedents with compared to without IDD. Comorbidities resulting from COVID-19 were similar among decedents with and without IDD, but there were some differences among reported pre-existing conditions, notably higher rates of hypothyroidism and seizures among decedents with IDD. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 mortality burden was greater for people with than without IDD during the first year of the pandemic. The continued practice of postmortem diagnostic overshadowing prevents analyzing whether this difference continues through today. Action is needed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to mitigate this data inequity. Out of an abundance of caution, medical providers should carefully monitor symptoms among COVID-19 patients with IDD diagnosed with hypothyroidism and/or seizures.

ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC OPINION ON THE NEED TO USE DIGITAL HEALTH SOLUTIONS BY RISK PATIENTS FOR CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death. Of these types of diseases, stroke was the leading cause of death in Bulgaria in 2018, accounting for almost 20% of all deaths. Mortality from coronary heart disease is the next leading cause, accounting for 11% of all deaths, despite a sharp decline since 2000. The importance of digital health solutions is growing and the role of the cardiology community is to support their rapid and effective implementation. This is becoming increasingly important in the context of pandemic crises with COVID-19 .Digital health solutions have the potential to identify at-risk patients, which allows for more aggressive intervention at an earlier stage of disease development - primary and secondary prevention.This could save time and financial resources for patients as well as for medical professionals and healthcare institutions. Nowadays, the possibilities of new technologies in cardiology are numerous - from telemedicine, through artificial intelligence in imaging to the processing and analysis of large data sets. Patients' remote monitoring devices are designed to increase home care. Hospitals could use these solutions to significantly reduce the costs and risks associated with hospitalization. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Management & Education / Upravlenie i Obrazovanie is the property of Prof. Dr. Assen Zlatarov University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Improving National Public Health Data Collection as an Act of Antiracism

In their study, Aliseda-Alonso et al. compared publicly available surveillance data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)to data on COVID-19 cases and deaths from state and territorial governmental sources;they found that the CDC consistently underreports the cases and deaths of Blacks and Latinos as well as people younger than 65 years. Standardizing data collection and reporting is necessary, but not sufficient, for interoperability-the ability of the US health system's many sectors to easily exchange information to benefit clinical, public health, and research efforts. A wide variety of data sources will be required, including, but not limited to, public health surveillance data, clinical data from public and private health systems, death certificates, claims, and administrative and survey data. The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology has created an Interoperability Standards Advisory process to provide information regarding standards needed for interoperability, although without the authority to require implementation or adoption.7 In a 2020 report, interoperability between health systems in the United States was reported to be improving, albeit slowly;it is concentrated in cities, is highly variable, and is associated with health system size.8 In Iran, Shanbehzadeh et al. consulted the literature and convened experts to create a COVID-19 minimum data set and interoperable reporting framework to support their nation's public health pandemic response.9 Following the implementation of a standardized, interoperable data collection system, states must be held accountable for data reporting.

Multimorbidity as assessed by reporting of multiple causes of death: variations by period, sociodemographic characteristics and place of death among older decedents in England and Wales, 2001-2017.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is common at older ages and is associated with disability, frailty and poor quality of life. Research using clinical databases and surveys has shown associations between multimorbidity and indicators of social disadvantage. Use of multiple coded death registration data has been proposed as an additional source which may also provide insights into quality of death certification. METHODS: We investigate trends in reporting multiple causes of death during 2001-2017 among decedents aged 65 years and over included in a census-based sample of 1% of the England and Wales population (Office for National Statistics Longitudinal Study). Using Poisson regression analysis, we analyse variations in number of mentions of causes of death recorded by time period, place of death, age, sex and marital status at death and indicators of health status and individual and area socioeconomic disadvantage reported at the census prior to death. RESULTS: Number of mentions of causes recorded at death registration increased 2001-2017, increased with age, peaking among decedents aged 85-9 years, and was positively associated with indicators of prior disadvantage and poor health, although effects were small. Number of mentions was highest for hospital decedents and similar for those dying in care homes or their own homes. CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic disadvantage, prior poor health, dying in hospital and older age-although not extreme old age-are associated with dying with more recorded conditions. Results may reflect both differences in multimorbidity at death and variations in quality of medical certification of death. Quality of death certification for decedents in care homes needs further investigation.

Autopsy and medical death certificates in deaths related to COVID-19

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has been the largest in the current century and the reason for numerous scientific works. In Cuba, the Temporary Group of Pathological Anatomy has been established to study the autopsies of those who died from COVID-19 (more than 400). The medical death certificates, documents of inestimable value, in Cuba are repaired according to the results of the autopsies, to raise their quality. Objectives: To evaluate the results of autopsies with COVID-19 diagnoses, compared to medical death certificates. Methods: The diagnoses of causes of death of 65 autopsies of the year 2020 were evaluated with their medical death certificates. The diagnoses were processed in the Automated System for the Registration and Control of Pathology. Direct causes of death, basic causes of death, intermediate causes of death, and contributing causes of death were analyzed. The total agreement of both diagnoses was defined, partial agreement, diagnostic mismatch or discrepancy, and insufficient data. Results: Diagnostic discrepancies of basic and direct cause of death are 46.2 % and 60.0 % of all cases and 19.4 % and 64.5 % when COVID-19 was basic cause of death. The high figures for diagnostic discrepancies correspond to those reported in previous studies, both in clinical diagnoses and in medical death certificates. Conclusions: There are high numbers of diagnostic discrepancies compared with the results of autopsies with COVID-19 diagnoses, compared to medical death certificates. © 2021, Editorial Ciencias Medicas. All rights reserved.

A Typology of COVID-19 Data Gaps and Noise From Long-Term Care Facilities: Approximating the True Numbers.

Although there is agreement that COVID-19 has had devastating impacts in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), estimates of cases and deaths have varied widely with little attention to the causes of this variation. We developed a typology of data vulnerabilities and a strategy for approximating the true total of COVID-19 cases and deaths in LTCFs. Based on iterative qualitative consensus, we categorized LTCF reporting vulnerabilities and their potential impacts on accuracy. Concurrently, we compiled one dataset based on LTCF self-reports and one based on confirmatory matching with California's COVID-19 databases, including death certificates. Through March 2021, Alameda County LTCFs reported 6663 COVID-19 cases and 481 deaths. In contrast, our confirmatory matching file includes 5010 cases and 594 deaths, corresponding to 25% fewer cases but 23% more deaths. We argue that the higher (self-report) case total approximates the lower bound of true COVID-19 cases, and the higher (confirmed match) death total approximates the lower bound of true COVID-19 deaths, both of which are higher than state and federal counts. LTCFs other than nursing facilities accounted for 35% of cases and 29% of deaths. Improving the accuracy of COVID-19 figures, particularly across types of LTCFs, would better inform interventions for these vulnerable populations.

Build It Better for Public Health: Improved Data Infrastructure Is Vital to Bending the Curve of the Overdose Crisis

For most decedents, the COD is determined by the attending physician or nurse;however, death investigations are required for cases in which the COD is sudden or unexpected, is not of natural causes, is unattended, or is unexplained.2 Therefore, coroners and medical examiners are typically the authorized certifiers of death in cases involving overdose.3 In this issue of AJPH (p. S36), Merlin et al. provide a timely analysis of overdose surveillance in the health care settings, where deaths may be miscategorized by attending physicians for decedents with underlying illness. According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data, of the 28 states with county coroners, 22 states do not have a state medical examiner, and half do not require the coroner position to be held by a medical professional or an individual with certified credentials to conduct autopsies, such as pathology, toxicology, and forensic medicine.4 The accuracy of COD related to drugs is higher for medical examiners than for coroners. [...]the specific drug was not listed for 38% of death certificates in states with decentralized county coroner systems, compared with 8% in states with a statewide medical examiner system, leading to underestimates for death rates.3 Even in situations where medical examiners are present, death investigations continue to be substantially underfunded and threaten the accuracy of COD data. COD determination exists within a broader context of institutional racism and racial bias in clinical policy and practice.11 Genomic research has unequivocally determined that race is not a biological categorization;yet, erroneous beliefs persist in the medical community about biological differences between Black and White individuals.12 These biases are associated with clinical recommendations and how services are delivered.13 Recognizing signs that overdose may have occurred is also limited by the lack of foundational training provided by medical institutions for substance use disorder, despite its being a leading COD for unintentional injury.

Guest editorial

Swift and decisive action was taken on the basis that homeless people were at greater risk of contracting the virus due to health disparities (e.g. the presence of underlying conditions and comorbidities), patterns of service utilization (e.g. reliance on congregate forms of accommodation and emergency service points) and the challenges of implementing effective mitigation measures (e.g. social distancing, self- isolation and shielding). Risk factors associated with some of the documented outbreaks include a lack of protective equipment, sanitation products, rapid testing and assistance for people living in group settings. Concomitantly, the ongoing global pandemic has revealed the extent to which some public health surveillance and data collection systems have struggled to capture COVID-19 mortality rates among people affected by homelessness (Doran and Tinson, 2021). The Centers for Disease and Prevention (CDU), the national public health agency of the United States, records deaths attributed to COVID-19 on death certificates with a high level of detail – e.g. demographic and geographic characteristics, and health disparities [2].

Timeliness of provisional United States mortality data releases during the COVID-19 pandemic: delays associated with electronic death registration system and weekly mortality.

All-cause mortality counts allow public health authorities to identify populations experiencing excess deaths from pandemics, natural disasters, and other emergencies. Delays in the completeness of mortality counts may contribute to misinformation because death counts take weeks to become accurate. We estimate the timeliness of all-cause mortality releases during the COVID-19 pandemic for the dates 3 April to 5 September 2020 by estimating the number of weekly data releases of the NCHS Fluview Mortality Surveillance System until mortality comes within 99% of the counts in the 19 March 19 2021 provisional mortality data release. States' mortality counts take 5 weeks at median (interquartile range 4-7 weeks) to completion. The fastest states were Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Utah, Idaho, and Hawaii. States that had not adopted the electronic death registration system (EDRS) were 4.8 weeks slower to achieve complete mortality counts, and each weekly death per 10^8 was associated with a 0.8 week delay. Emergency planning should improve the timeliness of mortality data by improving state vital statistics digital infrastructure.

Severe COVID-19 among patients with asthma and COPD: a report from the Swedish National Airway Register.

BACKGROUND: Patients with obstructive lung diseases may be at risk of hospitalization and/or death due to COVID-19. AIM: To estimate the frequency of severe COVID-19, and COVID-19-related mortality in a well-defined large population of patients with asthma and chronic inflammatory lung disease (COPD). Further to assess the frequency of asthma and COPD as registered comorbidities at discharge from hospital, and in death certificates. METHODS: At the start of the pandemic, the Swedish National Airway Register (SNAR) included 271,404 patients with a physician diagnosis of asthma and/or COPD. In September 2020, after the first COVID-19 wave in Sweden, the database was linked with the National Patient Register (NPR), the Swedish Intensive Care Register and the Swedish Cause of Death Register, which all provide data about COVID-19 based on International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes. Severe COVID-19 was defined as hospitalization and/or intensive care or death due to COVID-19. RESULTS: Among patients in SNAR, 0.5% with asthma, and 1.2% with COPD were identified with severe COVID-19. Among patients < 18 years with asthma, only 0.02% were severely infected. Of hospitalized adults, 14% with asthma and 29% with COPD died. Further, of patients in SNAR, 56% with asthma and 81% with COPD were also registered in the NPR, while on death certificates the agreement was lower (asthma 24% and COPD 71%). CONCLUSION: The frequency of severe COVID-19 in asthma and COPD was relative low. Mortality for those hospitalized was double as high in COPD compared to asthma. Comorbid asthma and COPD were not always identified among patients with severe COVID-19.

[COVID-19 deaths among residents of inpatient nursing homes in Munich-causes and places of death]. / COVID-19-Sterbefälle bei Bewohnern vollstationärer Pflegeeinrichtungen in München ­ Todesursachen und Sterbeorte.

INTRODUCTION: The new infectious disease COVID-19 first appeared in China in December 2019. So far, a systematic evaluation of death certificates of COVID-19-associated deaths of residents in inpatient nursing homes has not been presented. METHODS: Death certificates of all deaths in Munich in the death period from 1 March to 31 July 2020 were analyzed. Inclusion criteria were the presence of "Corona, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2" on the death certificates. Standardized, anonymized data entry was performed. The collected data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 5840 persons died, 281 (4.8%) of whom died of confirmed COVID-19 disease. Of those, 72 deaths involved residents of Munich nursing facilities. The most frequent causes of death were respiratory insufficiency (54 cases) and multiple organ failure (9 cases). On the death certificates, an average of two preexisting diseases had been reported; the average age at death was 88 years. All deaths of nursing home residents occurred in association with nosocomial COVID-19 outbreaks, which affected one-third of the facilities. The vast majority of these homes did not have a COVID-19 hygiene plan in place at the time. DISCUSSION: One quarter of all COVID-19 deaths in Munich occurred in the context of nosocomial outbreaks in elderly, chronically ill residents of nursing facilities. Evidence of inadequate risk assessment and inadequate hygiene management emerged. In the opinion of the authors, the appropriate structures for adequate hygiene management must be created and a hygiene regulation must be issued in which the tasks and responsibilities of the facility operators are defined.

Over- and under-estimation of COVID-19 deaths.

The ratio of COVID-19-attributable deaths versus "true" COVID-19 deaths depends on the synchronicity of the epidemic wave with population mortality; duration of test positivity, diagnostic time window, and testing practices close to and at death; infection prevalence; the extent of diagnosing without testing documentation; and the ratio of overall (all-cause) population mortality rate and infection fatality rate. A nomogram is offered to assess the potential extent of over- and under-counting in different situations. COVID-19 deaths were apparently under-counted early in the pandemic and continue to be under-counted in several countries, especially in Africa, while over-counting probably currently exists for several other countries, especially those with intensive testing and high sensitization and/or incentives for COVID-19 diagnoses. Death attribution in a syndemic like COVID-19 needs great caution. Finally, excess death estimates are subject to substantial annual variability and include also indirect effects of the pandemic and the effects of measures taken.

The COVID-19 pandemic and cause of death.

This article explores the emergence and development of Death Certificates as a means of establishing the cause of death for individuals and populations. The difficulty in choosing which disease caused death when several are described on the Certificate explains why the number of COVID-19-related deaths has been difficult to determine. This problem also draws attention to the dominant biomedical explanation for the cause of death that both promote and circumscribe what can be recognised as a valid cause.