In the measure of accuracy and transparency in reporting of Covid-19 data by the administration, Chandigarh shares its position with Telangana, Rajasthan and Assam. (Representational)
According to a study conducted by a team of researchers from Stanford University, Chandigarh has one of the worst reporting of official Covid-19 data in India. In a list of 29 states and Union Territories, Chandigarh landed at the sixth from last position, after Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Meghalaya, Himachal Pradesh and Andaman and Nicobar Islands. In the measure of accuracy and transparency in reporting of Covid-19 data by the administration, Chandigarh shares its position with Telangana, Rajasthan and Assam.
The study, which is yet to be peer reviewed, was published in the medical archive medXriv on July 21. It aims to evaluate whether transparent and accessible data on Covid-19 was disseminated in states across India, which is “critical for public health efforts”. The researchers ultimately found that there was great disparity in the ways in which states and the Union Territories have been reporting Covid-19 data, with the southern states of Karnataka, Kerala, Odisha, Puducherry and Tamil Nadu leading the score board in terms of providing comprehensive and accessible data reports to their citizens.
The study looks at the period between May 19 and June 1 for assessing the quality of Covid-19 reporting in these states. It excluded states and UTs like Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland, Sikkim and Lakshadweep, which had not more than 10 Covid-19 patients until May 18. The remaining 29 states and UTs which had more than 10 cases by May 18, were scored across four major categories- availability, accessibility, granularity and privacy of data. Using these categories, an overall score was awarded between 0.0 and 0.61, with a lower score indicating worse data reporting and higher score indicating better data reporting. Chandigarh scored 0.2 on this matrix.
Chandigarh lacks in ‘granularity’ and ‘privacy’
Chandigarh scored especially low in the ‘granularity’ criteria, along with a few other states and UTs, including Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Goa, Meghalaya, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh. According to the report, the UT Administration does not stratify and categorise the data on the basis of gender, age and demographic and nor does it provide daily details of patients in the ICU along with their co-morbidities.
Although Chandigarh provides information regarding the gender, age and address of the diagnosed patients, this data is not stratified. Meanwhile, no information is provided on the demographics of the patients. This, despite the number of cases reported in Chandigarh being relatively less than most of the states and UTs. Most recently, on Sunday, the bulletin was further diluted as the separate column containing information on the travel history and contact history of patients was removed.
In terms of privacy, the study states that “all of them except Chandigarh and Punjab, report de-identified information and do not violate the privacy of people residing in their state”. It added that Chandigarh has at times “released name and residential address of people under home quarantine”, while Punjab has released “name, gender, age, and mobile number of persons inbound to the state from New Delhi on May 10”. Chandigarh continues to make the details of home quarantined patients public.
Delay in reporting cases
Furthermore, the Chandigarh administration has on occasion delayed the reporting of Covid-19 cases and deaths in the city. While in the beginning, real time updates of new cases and deaths were provided by the UT Administration, now, cases are often reported one or two days after the diagnosis. This is especially the case for patients whose results come in the evening or at night. The administration releases only one bulletin, instead of a morning and evening bulletin as is released in some other states.
In one instance, a 57-year-old man from Sector 19 had tested positive on July 2, but was included in the daily bulletin only on July 8. In another instance, a PGIMER nurse tested positive for the disease on July 4, but was included in the bulletin on July 6. Deaths caused by Covid-19 are also often revealed a day after the patient passes away. The Indian Express knows of at least two such deaths out of the total 14 that have occurred in the city, which were reported a day after.
In contrast, Karnataka, with the highest score of 0.61, is an example worth emulating across criteria. According to the study, “the state releases a health bulletin and a state war room bulletin everyday, and also maintains a dashboard”. Apart from the general information on the number of cases, the bulletin reports on cases stratified by age, gender and districts. It “provides information on the total confirmed, deaths, recovered, quarantined, and active ICU cases”.
Furthermore, the state provides demographic as well as co-morbidities data of the deceased Covid-19 patients. It also provides graphics depicting trends in the state. In stark contrast, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar do not publish any data on government websites and were hence given a score of 0.0, landing them at the bottom of the list.