Abstract
Background The COVID-19 pandemic had resulted in over 20.5 million confirmed cases and 175,000 deaths in England by December 2023. The pandemic’s impact varied significantly across different population groups, influenced by deprivation, ethnicity, and policy measures.
Methods We analysed individual-level data on SARS-CoV-2 testing, hospitalisations, deaths, and vaccination records in England from May 2020 to February 2022. We used Poisson regression models to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for first pillar 2 PCR positive cases, associated hospitalisations, and deaths, adjusting for sex, ethnicity, deprivation, geographic region, age, and epidemiological week. Model selection was based on cross-validation and performance metrics (AIC, R2).
Findings The data analysed included 12,310,485 first SARS-CoV-2 pillar 2 PCR-confirmed infections, 79,315 hospitalisations, and 107,823 deaths associated with the first SARS-CoV-2 infection. Significant differences were observed across IMD quintiles, with the most deprived areas showing higher incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for death (1.64, 95% CI: 1.60-1.67) and hospitalisation (1.80, 95% CI: 1.75-1.85) compared to the least deprived areas as the reference group for the entire study period. Ethnic disparities were also notable, with higher IRRs for death and hospitalisation for all non-White ethnicities relative to White ethnicities as the reference group. We note that the magnitude of IRRs, for both deprivation and ethnicities, declined from the wild-type to the omicron periods for severe outcomes. For cases, we observed IRRs above one for non-White ethnicities during the wild-type and alpha periods only. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was also assessed, with models indicating a significant reduction in risk post-vaccination across all outcomes of interest.
Interpretation Deprivation and ethnicity significantly influenced COVID-19 outcomes in England. For severe outcomes, pre-existing health inequalities lead to large and persistent disparities. For infections, both protective and support measures need to be structured with ethnicity and deprivation in mind in the early parts of a pandemic.
Funding UK Medical Research Council, Schmidt Foundation, National Institute of Health Research, Community Jameel.
Evidence before this study The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted global health, and previous research has highlighted the role of socioeconomic factors, such as deprivation and ethnicity, in influencing outcomes. McGowan et al. found in a scoping review that 91% of studies showed significantly higher COVID-19 mortality in areas of social disadvantage relative to more affluent areas. A systematic review by Pan et al. 2 showed the impact of ethnicity on clinical outcomes in COVID-19. However, the impact of deprivation and ethnicity over different time periods of the COVID-19 pandemic and its interplay with public health measures is poorly understood.
Added value of this study This study leverages extensive data from multiple sources, including PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases, hospitalisation records, death registries, and vaccination databases, to comprehensively analyse COVID-19 outcomes in relation to deprivation and ethnicity across England. Using Poisson regression, we provide estimates of incidence rate ratios (IRR) associated with different levels of deprivation and ethnic backgrounds. This study also incorporates data on periods defined by dominant variants and public health measures, allowing for a more detailed examination of how these factors interact with local socioeconomic contexts to influence health outcomes.
Implications of all the available evidence The findings underscore the importance of considering disparities in COVID-19 outcomes by deprivation and ethnicity and highlight the need for targeted strategies to address these inequalities. Policymakers should prioritise resource allocation and tailored interventions in high-risk areas to mitigate the adverse impacts of the pandemic. Furthermore, the effectiveness of vaccination programs should be continuously evaluated in the context of these socioeconomic determinants to enhance their efficacy and reach. This research contributes to the growing body of evidence supporting the need for an equitable public health response that addresses the specific needs of diverse populations across different localities before the pandemic by reducing health inequalities and in the pandemic response.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
All authors acknowledge funding from the Medical Research Council (MRC) Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis (MR/X020258/1) funded by the UK MRC and carried out in the frame of the Global Health EDCTP3 Joint Undertaking supported by the EU; the NIHR for support for the Health Research Protection Unit in Modelling and Health Economics, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), Imperial College London, and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (grant code NIHR200908); a philanthropic donation from Community Jameel supporting the work of the Jameel Institute S.B. acknowledges support from the Novo Nordisk Foundation via The Novo Nordisk Young Investigator Award (NNF20OC0059309). SB acknowledges the Danish National Research Foundation (DNRF160) through the chair grant. S.B. acknowledges support from The Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fund for Strategic Innovation via the Schmidt Polymath Award (G-22-63345), which also supports C.M.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics committee permission was sought for the study via Imperial College Londons standard ethical review processes, and the study was approved by the Colleges Research Governance and Integrity Team (ICREC reference: 21IC6945).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
While all data used in this analysis were anonymised, the individual-level nature of the data used risks individuals being identified or being able to self-identify if it is released publicly. Requests for access to the underlying source data should be directed to UKHSA.
