BIASES IN COVID-19 CASE AND DEATH DEFINITIONS: POTENTIAL CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES


 This paper investigates three controversies involving potential causes and consequences of information bias in case and death definitions during the COVID-19 pandemic. First, evidence suggests China’s surveillance data were biased and misinterpreted by World Health Organization (WHO), prompting WHO to advise nations to copy China’s lockdowns. China appeared to use narrow diagnostic definitions that undercounted cases and deaths. Second, novel genomic data disseminated during the pandemic without adequate guidance from rigorous epidemiologic studies biased infection control policies in many countries. A novel genomic sequence of a virus is insufficient to declare new cases of a novel disease. Third, media reports of COVID-19 surveillance data in many nations appeared to be biased. Broadened surveillance definitions captured additional information, but unadjusted surveillance data disseminated to the public are not true cases and deaths. Recommendations include clarification of the proper use of diagnostic and surveillance case and death definitions to avoid information bias.