To what extent did mortality from COVID-19 in England and Wales differ for migrants compared to non-migrants in 2020 and 2021? A descriptive, observational study.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Lucinda Hiam, Jon Minton, Rachel Burns, Martin McKee, Robert W Aldridge
{"title":"To what extent did mortality from COVID-19 in England and Wales differ for migrants compared to non-migrants in 2020 and 2021? A descriptive, observational study.","authors":"Lucinda Hiam, Jon Minton, Rachel Burns, Martin McKee, Robert W Aldridge","doi":"10.1093/eurpub/ckae142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Seventeen percent of people living in the UK are migrants. In high-income countries, migrants have been shown to have better all-cause mortality but worse mortality for some specific causes such as infectious diseases. This observational study aims to quantify the extent to which mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) differed between migrants and non-migrants for the population of England and Wales, 2020-2021. We use Official National Statistics data to compare mortality from COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021 by country/region of birth, expressed as the standardized mortality ratio with those born in England and Wales as the reference population. Migrants from 17 of 19 countries/regions examined had higher mortality from COVID-19 than non-migrants. The highest mortality was those born in Bangladesh (females SMR = 3.39, 95% CIs 3.09-3.71; males 4.41, 95% CIs 4.09-4.75); Pakistan (females 2.73, 95% CIs 2.59-2.89; males 3.02, 95% CIs 2.89-3.14); and the Caribbean (females 2.03, 95% CIs 1.87-2.20; males 2.48, 95% CIs 2.37-2.60). Migrants born in Antarctica and Oceania (females 0.54, 95% CI 0.42-0.40; males 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-0.88), and North and Central America (females 0.95, 95% CI 0.80-1.11; males 0.85, 95% CI 0.72-0.99) had lower mortality than non-migrants. Most migrant populations had higher mortality from COVID-19 than non-migrants in England and Wales. Policy-makers must work to integrate migration status into routine data collection to inform future research and understand the causes of the inequalities seen.</p>","PeriodicalId":12059,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Public Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckae142","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Seventeen percent of people living in the UK are migrants. In high-income countries, migrants have been shown to have better all-cause mortality but worse mortality for some specific causes such as infectious diseases. This observational study aims to quantify the extent to which mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) differed between migrants and non-migrants for the population of England and Wales, 2020-2021. We use Official National Statistics data to compare mortality from COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021 by country/region of birth, expressed as the standardized mortality ratio with those born in England and Wales as the reference population. Migrants from 17 of 19 countries/regions examined had higher mortality from COVID-19 than non-migrants. The highest mortality was those born in Bangladesh (females SMR = 3.39, 95% CIs 3.09-3.71; males 4.41, 95% CIs 4.09-4.75); Pakistan (females 2.73, 95% CIs 2.59-2.89; males 3.02, 95% CIs 2.89-3.14); and the Caribbean (females 2.03, 95% CIs 1.87-2.20; males 2.48, 95% CIs 2.37-2.60). Migrants born in Antarctica and Oceania (females 0.54, 95% CI 0.42-0.40; males 0.71, 95% CI 0.51-0.88), and North and Central America (females 0.95, 95% CI 0.80-1.11; males 0.85, 95% CI 0.72-0.99) had lower mortality than non-migrants. Most migrant populations had higher mortality from COVID-19 than non-migrants in England and Wales. Policy-makers must work to integrate migration status into routine data collection to inform future research and understand the causes of the inequalities seen.

2020 年和 2021 年,英格兰和威尔士的 COVID-19 死亡率与非移民相比有多大差异?一项描述性观察研究。
生活在英国的人中有 17% 是移民。在高收入国家,移民的全因死亡率较高,但某些特殊原因(如传染病)的死亡率较低。本观察性研究旨在量化 2020-2021 年英格兰和威尔士人口中移民和非移民之间因冠状病毒疾病 2019(COVID-19)而导致的死亡率差异程度。我们利用国家官方统计数据,比较了 2020 年和 2021 年按出生国家/地区分列的 COVID-19 死亡率,以英格兰和威尔士出生人口为参照人口,用标准化死亡率表示。在所研究的 19 个国家/地区中,17 个国家/地区的移民的 COVID-19 死亡率高于非移民。死亡率最高的是出生在孟加拉国(女性 SMR = 3.39,95% CIs 为 3.09-3.71;男性 4.41,95% CIs 为 4.09-4.75)、巴基斯坦(女性 2.73,95% CIs 为 2.59-2.89;男性 3.02,95% CIs 为 2.89-3.14)和加勒比海地区(女性 2.03,95% CIs 为 1.87-2.20;男性 2.48,95% CIs 为 2.37-2.60)的移民。出生在南极洲和大洋洲(女性 0.54,95% CI 0.42-0.40;男性 0.71,95% CI 0.51-0.88)以及北美洲和中美洲(女性 0.95,95% CI 0.80-1.11;男性 0.85,95% CI 0.72-0.99)的移民死亡率低于非移民。在英格兰和威尔士,大多数移民的 COVID-19 死亡率高于非移民。政策制定者必须努力将移民状况纳入常规数据收集工作,以便为今后的研究提供信息,并了解造成不平等现象的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Public Health
European Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
2.30%
发文量
2039
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Public Health (EJPH) is a multidisciplinary journal aimed at attracting contributions from epidemiology, health services research, health economics, social sciences, management sciences, ethics and law, environmental health sciences, and other disciplines of relevance to public health. The journal provides a forum for discussion and debate of current international public health issues, with a focus on the European Region. Bi-monthly issues contain peer-reviewed original articles, editorials, commentaries, book reviews, news, letters to the editor, announcements of events, and various other features.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信