Abstract
Background Preliminary evidence has shown wide inequities in COVID-19 related deaths in the US. We explored the emergence of spatial inequities in COVID-19 testing, positivity, and incidence in New York City, Philadelphia, and Chicago.
Methods We used zip code-level data on cumulative tests and confirmed cases by date for each city and computed testing, positivity, and incidence indicators. We linked these to 2014-2018 American Community Survey data on income, education, race/ethnicity, occupation, health insurance, and overcrowding, and computed a summary index. We computed associations between using Poisson models. We also examined clusters of high and low incidence using the G* statistic.
Results Through May 18th, there were wide inequities in positivity and incidence, with less advantaged neighborhoods having a higher incidence (RR=1.36 [95% CrI 1.18;1.57], 1.17 [1.11;1.23], and 1.10 [0.98;1.23], per 1 SD increase in the summary index in Chicago, NYC and Philadelphia, respectively). In all three cities inequities in incidence increased as the pandemic advanced, while inequities in positivity remained stable. In contrast the social patterning of testing changed over time: testing was inversely associated with disadvantage early in the pandemic but was either not associated or positively associated with disadvantage later in the pandemic. We also found clusters of high and low incidence, co-located with areas of high and low disadvantage.
Conclusions We found wide spatial inequities in COVID-19 positivity and incidence in three large metropolitan areas of the US. In health crises health inequities become magnified and reflect a longstanding history of racial and economic injustice.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
UB was supported by the Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health under award number DP5OD26429. The funding agencies had no involvement in the study design; in the data collection, analyses or interpretation of data; in the writing of this work; or in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
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:
All data is publicly available and deidentified.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
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 and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data is publicly available. Code is available on a github repository.
