recovered time series on US

[mambon5]

Can someone please upload the time series on recovered people in the US by state? I am still puzzled how is it possible we have it for the different regions in China and not US?? Please I gotta fit my SIR.

[d76d30dbl]

All states do not track Recoveries --- if you go back to late Feb, many states were monitoring the positives and had counts for "monitored" and "no longer monitoring (recovered)". Then the numbers started growing fast and the monitoring programs were no longer feasible.

[briancpark]

@mambon5 I am also looking for recovered by state and county, but for the NYTimes database. It seems it is present here though? Is the recovered data not complete or inaccurate?

[mambon5]

I didn't find it. Honestly, I think it must be because of politics. Not reporting the recovered disables us from checking which states are doing a better job in curing people. Simply put.

[briancpark]

@mambon5 Well according to NYTimes, data seems to be unreliable for many states, leading to a misleading database.

"Many states seem to report "Recovered" as an inferred metric, where any case past a certain number of days is assumed to be recovered unless they've died."

And this statement also matches with what @d76d30dbl has stated. COVID-19 has been growing too fast for us to track at this point. At the time of writing this, we are nearly at 1.5 million cases in the US, equating to almost a third of the world cases. For China, they recovered greatly and lie just over 80,000 cases, which equates to nearly 2% of the world cases. Still a lot, but much more manageable numbers than now. Although you are welcome to have your own opinions on politics, please also consider the actual reality of the numbers.

[mambon5]

Oh wow. @briancpark are you a contributor to the database? Or are you just looking for the amount of recovered people by state just like me? I wonder why you say "according to NYTime"s and then the link you provide redirects me to your old post asking the same I am looking for. And what do you mean by US has 1/3 of total cases? Are you telling me that the US is able to count the amount of confirmed and infected an deceased people and not the recovered ones? This doesn't make much sense. If each hospital can write down how many people have been diagnosed with COVID19, I am sure they are also writing down how many people just recovered and freed a bed in that same hospital. Thank you for letting me have my own opinions. Still, I find no other explanation to why the governments report everything but recovered cases... that must be it then.

[HallidayDW]

@mambon5:

Since not all Confirmed cases are hospitalized (in fact, only a percentage are treated within a hospital), this is not about hospitals "counting" anything. Not even "freed beds".

The issue is tracking "Confirmed" cases, that are never hospitalized, but may not qualify as "Recovered", especially since they cannot be considered "Recovered" simply by not needing hospitalization.

The CDC has records of 1.5 million Confirmed cases, across the US (and its territories).

The CDC obtains Death reports of said cases that have died (some may not have been among those that were Conformed prior to their Death).

At this time, there is no tracking and official confirmation of Recoveries!

Even the WHO's "criteria" for "recovered" may be insufficiently stringent!

I, too, wish we had more reliable, "official" Recovered data!

We might be able to get there, now that the rate of new Confirmed cases appears to be diminishing, within the US, and some other countries. (Assuming that "opening up" doesn't lead to a "spike" in new cases.) However, even then, one would need to "track down" all Confirmed cases, after the fact!

(Remember: the US [as do many other countries] has "Privacy" Laws, especially for Medical Records!)

[mambon5]

Dear halliday, Yes. I understand very well everything you say. Even that the privacy of patients must be kept secret. But none of the facts that you exposed explains why the hospitals don't report at least the number of recovered patients that they treated. For sure some patients have been treated by the hospitals and then recovered right? Please report theses at least! That's all I say. Providing 0 recovered people makes it more difficult to fit many models. If for instance they reported the tracked recoveries (the ones that recovered in a hospital at least!) that would be already something. About those who they send sick at home, they do it (the doctors) because they are obviously less critical than the patients they keep at the hostipal (otherwise they would keep them at the hospital!) so they are expected to recover in the following weeks. THen report them as sick and after 15 days check them as recovered. This is a way of reporting properly the number of recovered people without any conflict of any sort. privacy plays no role here. No personal data is displayed I don't know why you said that. Only the number of recovered people is reported. And at least, the US could report the number of tracked recoveries per state! If they don't do it, again, I am afraid it only has one logical answer and it is politics.

[HallidayDW]

@mambon5:

Part of the trouble is that when a Hospital releases a patient, it need not be that the patient can actually be claimed to have "recovered", yet. (Certainly not in anything like an official manner.)

This is even mores the case when Hospitals are running short of bed space!

While you are absolutely correct that the release of recovery numbers does not involve any release of identifying information, the very nature of tracking—practically by definition—requires the use of uniquely identifying information.

That's why I mentioned the privacy law issue.

Even tracking the patients released by the hospital involves such.

You state that "those who they send sick at home, they do it (the doctors) because they are obviously [more or less] less critical than the patients they keep at the hostipal[sic] (otherwise they would keep them at the hospital!) so they are expected to recover in the following weeks".

However, things don't always go according to "expectations". (I've seen multiple cases in point, including close friends).

Again, though, to check on them involves the use of personally identifying information!

One would hope that there is appropriate patient followup, using their doctors.

However, even that is "iffy", with so many with less than adequate medical insurance.

To ASUME "recovery", simply due to the passage of time is to artificially affect the data, as much as not reporting non-official Recovery data.

Now. if there are these "mythical"

tracked recoveries per state!

it sure would be nice to have this data.

Can you suggest a source (without proposing a "conspiracy theory" for why such is unobtainable)?