Abstract
Importance Rising Covid19 cases in the US are attributed by some political leaders to more testing. Positivity-ratios (cases to tests ratio) in conjunction with cases and tests provide a better overview. However, comprehensive overviews of positivity-ratio patterns are scarce.
Objective To examine trends in positivity-ratios, tests and cases by state from mid-April-mid-July. Further, to examine whether positivity-ratio patters are associated with state political-affiliations.
Methods State-level publicly available data on Covid19 is used. Seven-day moving averages (MA7) of positivity-ratio are computed for April 21-July 15. States are assigned to four groups based on patterns of change in positivity-ratio – higher at end of study period than beginning (Group 1), initial decline but subsequent increase starting Memorial Day weekend (Group 2), initial decrease but an upturn in last 14 days (Group 3), and consistent downward trend (Group 4). ‘Political-affiliation’ is categorized as ‘Republican-leaning’ if President Trump won the state and the governor is Republican. Additionally, a proxy measure is used to indicate intensity of Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests in the state. Associations are tested using chi-square analysis.
Results Fourteen states are in Group 1, fifteen states in Group 2, fifteen states in Group 3, and six states and DC in Group 4. 78.57% of Group 1, 33.33% of Group 2, 40% of group 3, and none in Group 4 were Republican-leaning. The difference in distribution was statistically significant (p<0.01). Distribution of ‘high’ intensity BLM protests across the four groups was not statistically different (p>0.10).
Conclusion Increased Covid19 cases cannot be attributed to more testing. Indeed, the high positivity-ratios in most states indicate current testing is failing to capture actual infection rates. The association between state political-affiliation and positivity-ratios suggests Republican voters may be somewhat more skeptical of the gravity of the disease and emphasizes the importance of messaging by political leaders.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding source.
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:
The study was approved as 'Not Human Subject' by IRB of University of Alabama at Birmingham
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
All data in this manuscript are from publicly available sources.