Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Feb 5;16(2):e0246663. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246663

An open-sourced, web-based application to analyze weekly excess mortality based on the Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series

László Németh 1,*, Dmitri A Jdanov 1,2, Vladimir M Shkolnikov 1,2
Editor: Bernardo Lanza Queiroz3
PMCID: PMC7864412  PMID: 33544767

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic stimulated the interest of scientists, decision makers and the general public in short-term mortality fluctuations caused by epidemics and other natural or man-made disasters. To address this interest and provide a basis for further research, in May 2020, the Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series was launched as a new section of the Human Mortality Database. At present, this unique data resource provides weekly mortality death counts and rates by age and sex for 38 countries and regions. The main objective of this paper is to detail the web-based application for visualizing and analyzing the excess mortality based on the Short-term Mortality Fluctuation data series. The application yields a visual representation of the database that enhances the understanding of the underlying data. Besides, it enables the users to explore data on weekly mortality and excess mortality across years and countries. The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, to describe a visualization tool that aims to facilitate research on short-term mortality fluctuations. Second, to provide a comprehensive open-source software solution for demographic data to encourage data holders to promote their datasets in a visual framework.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic indicated the lack of publicly available data needed to trace the course of epidemics and provide a data-based ground for political decisions in response to short-term health challenges. The monitoring of the rapidly changing situation is a major challenge for statistical and public health systems during short term disasters. Data by causes of death can not be used for such monitoring because of differences in coding, approaches to testing in case of infectious diseases, and a long delay of data release. The causes of death statistics (mortality from influenza and other respiratory conditions) may also grossly understate the total death toll.

The excess mortality method is an important instrument to overcome these problems. The SARS-Cov-2 pandemic and other epidemics cause substantially more deaths than the officially registered deaths from COVID-19, influenza and/or all respiratory diseases. Many deaths happen due to the aggravation of pre-existing health conditions in the elderly. The method has been acknowledged by researchers and health authorities as the most reliable and objective way for the assessment of mortality elevation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic [14]. It is important to stress that this method is independent of the variability and the incomparability of diagnostics and causes of death coding across countries and time.

In May 2020, in response to the growing demand for such data, the Human Mortality Database (HMD, [5]) team launched the Short-term Mortality Fluctuations (STMF) data series. Currently, the STMF data series contains weekly death counts and death rates by age and sex for 38 countries and regions and is still growing. For an overview of the current coverage of the STMF see S1 Table. It is maintained jointly by the Max Planck Institute for Demo-graphic Research and the University of California at Berkeley under the aegis of the HMD, one of the most frequently used resources in demography.

The STMF provides data files in xlsx and csv formats, country- and region-specific metadata including a detailed description of data sources and data quality issues as well as a detailed description of the methodology applied. The STMF includes detailed data on death rates and counts that are given by broad age groups (0-14, 15-64, 65-74, 75-84, and 85+) and for all ages combined. Death rates are weekly rates, i.e. number of deaths per person-week.

We decided to add a visualization layer to the database to simplify the access to the data and enhance the basic understanding of the data for non-professional users. We also intended to facilitate and stimulate research on mortality outbreaks and seasonal variations for professional users by providing a user-friendly tool for preliminary analysis. Finally, we would like to encourage dataset owners by providing our script creating this visualization tool in an online repository to showcase their data sources.

In the next section we provide a summary of the technical details and introduce the main features of the web-based tool.

Materials and methods

The STMF visualization tool is an open-sourced, web-based shiny application for displaying excess mortality in weekly death counts or death rates. The tool can be accessed at https://mpidr.shinyapps.io/stmortality. The script is written in R programming language with the shiny [6], data.table [7], and ggplot2 [8] packages with customizations added in HTML, JavaScript and CSS languages. We aimed to rely on the least amount of basic packages for simplicity, compatibility and maintenance reasons. The repository is publicly available at the following web address: https://github.molgen.mpg.de/nemeth/stmortality.

The graphical user interface of the visualization tool can be divided into three main parts (see Fig 1). On the left-hand side, in the sidebar panel, different input variables can be selected to determine the method for calculation of excess mortality and to calibrate the figure shown under the title in the main graphical panel next to the sidebar. Summary statistical information on excess mortality can be acquired by interaction with this figure. These appear either in the figure overlaid or shown under the figure (e.g. in a table) after the user interacted with the figure. The figures can be also stored as images after right-clicking on them.

Fig 1. The interface of the visualization tool.

Fig 1

The sidebar (indicated by green) contains the user input variables and links to the data source. The main figure appears in the area designated by orange color and summary statistical information is shown below the graphics in the blue area after user interaction.

The different functions of the web application are summarized in the User’s Guide accessible in the sidebar. In addition, the application has information buttons (represented by a blue letter i in bold) to give hints and explanations to the user of the various features on the website. These hints are revealed upon hovering with the cursor over the information buttons.

Links to the project’s website on the HMD (under the title) and STMF directly to download data, metadata, and methodological notes are placed in the sidebar.

Input variables

A few input variables in the sidebar allow to determine how the main figure displaying excess mortality in the main panel is built. As a first step, a ‘Country or region’ has to be selected out of the 38 countries and regions available in the STMF. The database provides death counts and death rates for all ages combined and by broad age groups, i.e., for 0-14, 15-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85+. One of these mortality measures has to be selected as the ‘Measure’ variable. The user has to define the ‘Sex’ variable as well, with its values being females, males and both sexes.

From the available years for the selected country or region a ‘Target year’ can be selected. The target year is the main focus of interest and it is compared to a reference level to quantify the magnitude of the excess mortality in the target year, i.e., the difference between the target year and the reference level. The reference level is calculated for a user-defined reference period, a subset of the available years in the dataset. The next section, ‘Estimation of excess mortality’ provides details on the calculation of the implemented ‘Reference level’ input variable.

It is possible to plot all available years for a country or region by clicking on the ‘Show other years’ checkbox. When checked, the available years appear in light gray color and information on all data points are accessed by the click point information (see details in the ‘Graphical and numerical presentation of excess mortality’ section).

Selecting the ‘Additional country or region’ checkbox reveals a new graphical panel below the main figure with the same features as the main figure and can be calibrated independently with input controls appearing additionally. This enables the user to compare two different countries and regions with each other or even different target years or reference levels, etc. of the same country or region.

With the help of the colored boxes next to the paintbrush icon the user can change the color scheme applied to the figures.

Estimation of excess mortality

Direct and indirect estimations of excess mortality during wars and epidemics have a long history. In order to estimate the excess flu or heatwave deaths, researchers usually rely on the difference between the observed and expected (according to the usual conditions) number of deaths. The crucial methodological challenge is to estimate the expected mortality pertaining to a given week.

In the literature, there are two major approaches to the estimation of the intra-annual excess mortality [9, 10]. The first one is focused on the variation of mortality across weeks within a year in question and expresses a notion of “seasonality” [1114]. The second one (actively used for assessment of the COVID-19-related mortality) investigates the mortality deviations for certain weeks compared to the mortality experience of previous years [10, 1517]. This estimation depends on two components: a general mortality trend during the last few years and seasonal fluctuations. Such an estimation can be done using regression analysis [18] or the method of time series analysis [19, 20]. In the web application, based on various assumptions we implemented six different methods of the reference level for excess mortality estimation: the week-specific averages, the week-specific trends, the week-specific lower quartiles, the yearly average-week, the summer average-week, and the yearly lower-quartile-week. The first three methods determine reference levels corresponding to the second estimation approach, while the latter three correspond to the first approach. Nevertheless, this set should not be considered as exhaustive and we implemented them to present the variability of estimates.

Let xij denote the value of the user-selected measure on week i in year j.

The Week-specific Averages for week i, x¯i equals the arithmetical mean over the years in the selected period and is given by

x¯i=jPxij|P|, (1)

where the set P contains all years in the selected reference period and |P| denotes the number of elements in the set P. The reference period may or may not include the target year.

For the target year T and for week i, the reference level predicted by the Week-specific Trends, x^i is the expected value of a linear model estimated by ordinary least squares (OLS) over the years in the selected reference period. If there are 22 weeks available in the target year then the reference level consists of the results of 22 independent linear models. The estimation is carried out via the lm function of the stats package in R [21]. The reference level is given by

x^i=a^i+b^iT, (2)

where a^i and b^i are the estimated coefficients of the OLS regression over the reference period for week i.

The Week-specific Lower Quartiles for week i, xiQ1 is the average of the values of the selected measure below the lower quartile in the reference period for week i. We implemented the calculation of the lower quartile with the help of the quantile function from the stats package. If there are 34 weeks available in the target year then this reference level requires the calculation of 34 lower quartiles, one for each week separately. Therefore, this reference level consists of values defined by

xiQ1=jLixij|Li|Li:={jP:xijquantile({xij:jP},0.25)} (3)

The Yearly Average-week, x¯ is the mean value of x¯i values defined by Eq (1) for the available weeks in the target year and is calculated by

x¯=iWx¯i|W|, (4)

where W is the set of available weeks in the target year. Please note, if not all weeks are available in the target year, then |W| could be lower than 52. As a consequence, x¯ denotes the expected level of mortality if every week had the same average level of mortality in the year. This reference level, in contrast to the week-specific averages, reflects the seasonal variation of mortality within a calendar year or a number of years.

The Summer Average-week, x¯* is similar to the above-mentioned yearly-average-week value, i.e. x¯, but excludes from the calculation the winter weeks that tend to have higher mortality in general in comparison to summer weeks. For countries and regions in the Northern Hemisphere we define winter season as weeks from calendar week 1 to week 12 and from 48 to week 52 included, and weeks 22 and 38 for those situated in the Southern Hemisphere. Thus, generally, the value of x¯* is expected to be lower than x¯. The formula for the Summer Average-week is given by

x¯*=iW*x¯i|W*| (5)

with W* denoting the set of non-winter weeks, i.e., available weeks between calendar weeks 13 and 47 for the Northern Hemisphere and weeks 1 to 21 and 39 to 52 in the Southern Hemisphere.

The Yearly Lower-quartile-week, x¯Q1 is the average of the values not greater than the lower quartile based on all the values of the user-selected measure in the reference period. This reference level requires the calculation of only one lower quartile value over a single year, e.g., for the target year, or over multiple years (lower quartile of the reference period). The Yearly Lower-quartile-week is defined by

x¯Q1=Lxij|L|L:={xij:xijquantile({xij:jP},0.25)} (6)

Eqs 1, 2 and 3 correspond to the mainstream approach that compares the observed week-specific mortality with that during a certain reference period. Correspondingly, the reference level of mortality varies across weeks. Eq 1 determines the reference level as the average over the reference period (following the excess mortality monitoring procedures by the Office of National Statistics in England and Wales, the New York Times, the Financial Times, the Our World in Data, etc.). In some countries (especially countries of Eastern Europe) mortality was steeply decreasing over the last 15-18 years. To address these trends, Eq 2 determines the baseline as a continuation of the week-specific trends. To address the heat-wave outbreaks and other mortality elevations out of the winter season, Eq 3 defines the reference level of mortality as the average mortality for the lower quartile of the mortality distribution across weeks within the reference period.

According to the mainstream practice by the Office of National Statistics in England and Wales and others, the reference period includes several years (usually 4-7 years) preceding the target year. For example, the years 2015-19 with 2020 as a target year. However, depending on the purpose, the reference period can be longer or shorter and may also include the target year (e.g. interpolation instead of extrapolation).

Eqs 4, 5 and 6 correspond to the “seasonality” approach. The excess mortality expresses losses due to the mortality difference between different periods within a year (or a number of years). Here, the reference level of mortality is a week-independent constant. In Eq 4, the reference level is defined as the average across all available weeks. In Eq 5, this level is defined as an average of mortality over a lower mortality season (non-winter season). In Eq 6, the low mortality season is defined in a flexible way according to mortality across weeks based on the lower quartile.

Eqs 4 to 6 may be used with the reference period consisting of the target year only. In this case, the excess mortality expresses the mortality elevation compared to the average mortality for all 52 weeks or to the average mortality over the lower-mortality weeks of the target year. However, if weekly mortality experiences large random fluctuations (in countries with small populations), the reference period could include the target year and a few years before this year, e.g., the years 2014-18 with 2018 as a target year.

Graphical and numerical presentation of excess mortality

An important feature of the visualization tool is the possibility to estimate the intra-annual excess mortality. Upon opening the application, a country or region is presented with a focus on the excess mortality in 2020 compared to the reference level of week-specific averages over the whole available period of the previous years. There are three possible ways of interaction with the figure.

Firstly, hovering with the cursor over an interval that contains excess mortality (or deficit) polygon, information on this polygon is provided in a pop-up bubble next to the cursor, detailing the start and end weeks; and the length of this polygon. The example in Fig 2 gives information on a 25-week-long excess mortality polygon between weeks 1 and 25.

Fig 2. Hover information of a polygon.

Fig 2

Information on the duration—the start, end and length—of an excess mortality polygon appears on hovering over a polygon.

Second, selection in the figure by brushing with the cursor reveals summary information below the figure. The sum of death counts or the mean of the death rates over the selected weeks are shown by sex and the type of the difference between the target year and the reference level. The example in Fig 3 shows a selection between weeks 8 and 20 for the year 2020 compared to the reference period of 2010-2019 for England and Wales. During these weeks England and Wales faced a total of 61275 excess deaths. Please note that the selection is week-dependent and summary statistics might not correspond to the exact area of the selection on the other axis, e.g., in this figure the tip of the excess mortality polygon is not selected.

Fig 3. Summary statistics information of a selection.

Fig 3

Information on death counts or death rates of the selected weeks by sex and type of difference are displayed below the figure.

Third, when the checkbox ‘Show other years’ is selected clicking in the figure in the vicinity of a data point reveals information on the nearest data point. Fig 4 presents a click event for French females with target year 2020. The click point information identifies the data point from 2003 on week 33 that pertains to the unusually high amount of the total deaths due to the heatwave in that year. As a consequence, click point information can speed up outlier identification significantly.

Fig 4. Click point information.

Fig 4

Clicking in the figure helps identifying the nearest data point by revealing which year and week it pertains to.

All the above-mentioned interaction methods are available for the additional country or region panel, therefore, summary and click point information can be directly compared below the figures.

Discussion and conclusion

The STMF is a new resource for filling the data gap in excess mortality estimation by providing both death rates and deaths. The basic features of the web-based visualization tool are already powerful enough to perform exploratory studies on the STMF data series and the simple layout of the visualization is transparent for use. Due to the open data policy of the STMF, our web application directly provides numerical values of death rates and excess mortality information for chosen periods within the target year. In addition, the web application enables the user to compare two country or region graphs with a flexible choice of the reference period and the measure of excess mortality. The implemented measures of intra-annual excess mortality provide a range of possible estimates and should help the users to form their own evidence-based opinion.

The tool has several limitations that are mainly direct consequences of the limitations of the STMF dataset. First, only countries or regions with high-quality population estimates and death statistics are included in the STMF. Therefore, the functionality of the web application is limited to these countries or regions, some of which provide a short time series only. Another limitation of our web application is the number of implemented definitions of excess mortality. We included only the most transparent and simple methods. We do not provide confidence limits for calculated quantities. Be that as it may, the customization and implementation of additional definitions of excess mortality is straightforward based on the source code available in the public repository.

The monitoring of the ongoing pandemic and the effectiveness of policy responses have been seriously affected by the lack of clearly defined criteria and reliable timely evidence based on the scale and course of the pandemic. The intra-annual excess mortality estimation provides an objective, reliable measurement that is clearly defined, easily understandable, and comparable across countries. This measurement has important advantages over COVID-19 morbidity and cause of death data comparisons suffering from multiple deficiencies related to differences in testing coverage and coding practices. In addition, the data on all-cause mortality is available after a reasonable short delay of few weeks while data on causes of death is published with a delay of one year or more. In this way, the visualization tool contributes to the dissemination of information to society and policy-makers about the real scale and course of epidemics by avoiding misleading information and speculations based on deficient data.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Supplementary table on the current status of the STMF dataset.

The table describes the time horizon the data is available for each country.

(PDF)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Maayke de Boer, Magali Barbieri, Ainhoa Alustiza-Galarza, France Meslé and David Leon for the helpful comments on usage of the web-based tool. The authors are grateful to Rainer Walke and Dirk Vieregg for facilitating the online framework for the web tool.

Data Availability

The data are available from the Human Mortality Database (https://www.mortality.org). The source code repository is accessible on GitHub (https://github.molgen.mpg.de/nemeth/stmortality).

Funding Statement

The work on the tool and the paper was supported by the Volkswagen Foundation (project "Strengthening a reliable evidence base for monitoring the COVID-19 and other disasters"). Support from the Basic Research Program of the National Research University Higher School of Economics is also gratefully acknowledged. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1. Leon DA, Shkolnikov VM, Smeeth L, Magnus P, Pechholdová M, Jarvis CI. COVID-19: a need for real-time monitoring of weekly excess deaths. The Lancet. 2020;395(10234):e81 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30933-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Beaney T, Clarke JM, Jain V, Golestaneh AK, Lyons G, Salman D, et al. Excess mortality: the gold standard in measuring the impact of COVID-19 worldwide? Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 2020;113(9):329–334. 10.1177/0141076820956802 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Aron J, Giattino C Muellbauer J, Ritchie H. A pandemic primer on excess mortality statistics and their comparability across countries. Our World in Data. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Krelle H, Barclay C, Tallack C. Understanding excess mortality: what is the fairest way to compare COVID-19 deaths internationally. The Health Foundation. 2020;6. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.HMD. The Human Mortality Database; 2020. http://www.mortality.org/.
  • 6.Chang W, Cheng J, Allaire J, Xie Y, McPherson J. shiny: Web Application Framework for R; 2020. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=shiny.
  • 7.Dowle M, Srinivasan A. data.table: Extension of ‘data.frame’; 2020. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=data.table.
  • 8.Wickham H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York; 2016. Available from: https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org.
  • 9. Rau R. Seasonality in human mortality: a demographic approach. Springer Science & Business Media; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Nicoll A, Ciancio B, Chavarrias VL, Mølbak K, Pebody R, Pedzinski B, et al. Influenza-related deaths-available methods for estimating numbers and detecting patterns for seasonal and pandemic influenza in Europe. Eurosurveillance. 2012;17(18):20162 10.2807/ese.17.18.20162-en [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Sakamoto-Momiyama M. Changes in the seasonality of human mortality: a medico-geographical study. Social Science & Medicine Part D: Medical Geography. 1978;12(1):29–42. 10.1016/0160-8002(78)90005-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Andreev E, Biryukov V. Influence of influenza epidemics on mortality in Russia (In Russian). Vestnik Statistiki. 1998;(2):73–77. [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Healy JD. Excess winter mortality in Europe: a cross country analysis identifying key risk factors. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 2003;57(10):784–789. 10.1136/jech.57.10.784 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Liddell C, Morris C, Thomson H, Guiney C. Excess winter deaths in 30 European countries 1980–2013: a critical review of methods. Journal of Public Health. 2016;38(4):806–814. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Thompson WW, Weintraub E, Dhankhar P, Cheng PY, Brammer L, Meltzer MI, et al. Estimates of US influenza-associated deaths made using four different methods. Influenza and other respiratory viruses. 2009;3(1):37–49. 10.1111/j.1750-2659.2009.00073.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Nielsen J, Mazick A, Glismann S, Mølbak K. Excess mortality related to seasonal influenza and extreme temperatures in Denmark, 1994-2010. BMC infectious diseases. 2011;11(1):350 10.1186/1471-2334-11-350 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Kontis V, Bennett JE, Rashid T, Parks RM, Pearson-Stuttard J, Guillot M, et al. Magnitude, demographics and dynamics of the effect of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on all-cause mortality in 21 industrialized countries. Nature medicine. 2020; p. 1–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Simonsen L, Reichert TA, Viboud C, Blackwelder WC, Taylor RJ, Miller MA. Impact of influenza vaccination on seasonal mortality in the US elderly population. Archives of internal medicine. 2005;165(3):265–272. 10.1001/archinte.165.3.265 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Nielsen J, Vestergaard LS, Richter L, Schmid D, Bustos N, Asikainen T, et al. European all-cause excess and influenza-attributable mortality in the 2017/18 season: should the burden of influenza B be reconsidered? Clinical microbiology and infection. 2019;25(10):1266–1276. 10.1016/j.cmi.2019.02.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Nunes B, Viboud C, Machado A, Ringholz C, Rebelo-de Andrade H, Nogueira P, et al. Excess mortality associated with influenza epidemics in Portugal, 1980 to 2004. PloS one. 2011;6(6):e20661 10.1371/journal.pone.0020661 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Team RC. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.; 2015. Available from: http://www.R-project.org. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz

22 Dec 2020

PONE-D-20-34864

An open-sourced, web-based application to analyze weekly mortality excess based on the Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Németh,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

This is a very important paper and contribution to the field and public health planning. The paper reads well and informs the reader about the database and how one is supposed to use it. As for an academic paper, based on the reviewers and my own reading, we believe it needs very minor adjustments. The main one is related to the calculation of excess mortality - please provide more detail. There are also some minor adjustments in language and several typos across the paper. I am looking forward to see the revised version. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 23 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This submission provides an overview of the new Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series, available at the Human Mortality Database, and a new tool for visualizing excess mortality.

The paper is very informative and easy to understand, even for non-technical users. I have only a couple of minor comments, which should addressed in a revision:

• Main title, lines 113 and 126: You're juggling around with the terms "excess mortality" vs. "mortality excess". As the term "excess mortality" is commonly used in epidemiological studies, you should stick with it or, if applicable, "excess deaths".

• Line 7: please delete the URL from the brackets and stick to the common citation style of internet sources.

• Line 8: The "STMF" abbreviation should be put before "data series", not after, as that is not included in the abbreviation.

• Lines 10-11: Please delete the country listing. Instead, I would like to see a table in the appendix, which contains a line for each country with the information, for which time horizon the data is available in each country. This varies significantly between the countries and you could give for the users a quick overview, which would be useful for comparative international studies. This table would be a nice addition to the description you provide here.

• Line 13: Add an "s" to "resource".

• Line 43: Change "These appear" to "This appears"

• I would like to know in the discussion, why you don't also provide weekly data on cause-specific mortality and whether you plan to do so eventually. I know there's a report on the HMD homepage where you mention that as well. Please discuss this topic shortly in this contribution as well.

I suggest publication of the contribution after having addressed my points.

Reviewer #2: This is really great and I'm very thankful the teams at Max Planck and Berkeley have put this incredible resource together. As a long time user of the HMD, I just want to first say thank you!

I only have two minimal comments that should be very easy to address and do not preclude publication.

1) I'd like to see the authors include the calculations they are using for excess mortality in this manuscript.

2) There are a few minor typos throughout.

Again, thank you for providing such valuable resources!

Reviewer #3: An open-sourced, web-based application to analyze weekly mortality excess based on

the Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series

A. Overview:

This article presents a novel tool for visualizing weekly excess mortality in 36 countries. Excess mortality provides us with valuable information during an epidemic or other natural or man-made disasters. In the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic, excess mortality estimations have been invaluable to evaluate the impacts of the pandemic and to compare territories. The tool presented is simple, yet it could be of vital importance to examine and compare the evolution of mortality in this and in other health emergencies and disasters worldwide. I really appreciated the simplicity and speed of the tool (other shiny apps can be quite slow). I think the article is interesting for a wide range of readers (researchers, demographers, public health professionals, policymakers etc.) and is suitable for publication in this journal; but I have some observations:

B. Major Comments:

1. The introduction is too short, and it fails to provide the necessary justification for the tool presented. A brief description of excess mortality and its usefulness for public health and policy will really help to show non-specialist readers the true importance of the data and visualizations provided. A proper contextualization of the COVID-19 pandemic and how excess mortality is helpful in this context can also be important.

2. As excess mortality is the main measure presented in the paper, further description of the different estimation methods (and why you choose the ones presented in the paper) is needed. For example, why did you decided to choose the average of the reference period and not the maximum historical value? What is the recommended reference period? Why eliminate winter months but keep summer months of years with clear outliers as European countries in 2003? A brief explanation on the methods will really help the reader to understand these questions.

3. When explaining the reference levels, you define a summer and winter seasons based on calendar weeks. This definition does not fit for countries in the southern hemisphere. Please correct or explain.

4. Both of the presented estimations (numerical excess deaths and crude death rates) do not allow comparisons between countries (because of population size, mortality trends and socio-demographical characteristics as ageing). This has to be addressed in the paper. Is there a way to compare territories? Can the excess mortality in percentage be useful?

5. The discussion is short and I fond that much can be said about the usefulness, limitations and strengths of the tool. Also, the reference to the fertility tool is not well connected to the rest of the article (how the fertility tool relates to short term mortality fluctuations?).

C. Minor Comments:

1. Why did you decided to include the target year in the linear models to estimate reference levels? Please explain.

2. When presenting death rates, it could be better to include the value in death per 10.000 or 100.000 persons/week. The interpretation of decimals can be hard for many readers.

3. The figures presented are low quality and do not reflect the beauty of the web tool.

4. The tool allows to change the colors of the graphs, which is helpful; but when displaying two graphs, it does not allow to change colors of each individual graph. For comparisons, this could be a neat feature.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Patrizio Vanella

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Andrés Peralta Chiriboga

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Feb 5;16(2):e0246663. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246663.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


22 Jan 2021

Dear Editor, Dear Reviewers, please see our responses in the Response to Reviewers file uploaded with the revision as requested by the editor in the decision letter.

Attachment

Submitted filename: responsetoreviewers.pdf

Decision Letter 1

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz

25 Jan 2021

An open-sourced, web-based application to analyze weekly excess mortality based on the Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series

PONE-D-20-34864R1

Dear Dr. Németh,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Regarding the inclusion of the statement about the funding, I believe the production team is responsible for adding the information. As the Academic Editor, I appreciate the information sent by the authors. I would like to congratulate the authors for this important contribution - not only the paper, but the public available database that is extremely relevant in the current situation. 

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz

27 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-34864R1

An open-sourced, web-based application to analyze weekly excess mortality based on the Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series

Dear Dr. Németh:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Bernardo Lanza Queiroz

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Supplementary table on the current status of the STMF dataset.

    The table describes the time horizon the data is available for each country.

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: responsetoreviewers.pdf

    Data Availability Statement

    The data are available from the Human Mortality Database (https://www.mortality.org). The source code repository is accessible on GitHub (https://github.molgen.mpg.de/nemeth/stmortality).


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES