Talk:List of human disease case fatality rates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Medicine (Rated List-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

For the layman[edit]

Hi. Onc clear that the technical term is "human disease case fatality rates", is there a difference referring to it as "human disease fatality rates"? Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 23:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Case fatality rate (CFR) is a specific technical term, with its own article. (talk) 19:45, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Major overhaul of the table[edit]

As the table was, those diseases whose values are "untreated" were hard to distinguish. I added a column for that data to be represented. I left the Disease column alone, still noting the untreated information there as well until this issue is completed, to minimize confusion if edits need to be made.

However, this is really only a partial fix. The values for some diseases are only given untreated (eg rabies), but others list values for both treated and untreated (eg Typhoid fever). It makes sense to me to have the values linked in some way when talking about the same disease. In some cases, it would make a lot of sense for the table to represent both values via separate columns rather than entries being listed on separate rows. However, this isn't as simple as the table gets; smallpox is listed five times.

Considered layouts[edit]

Following is a small sample of the table as it is currently represented. It lists smallpox five times, for various reasons; typhoid twice, treated and untreated; and rabies once. None of these show any relationship to each other, and it is hard to see that there is no data for "rabies, treated", or that there is data for two conditions of typhoid.

Data as it is currently
Rabies, untreated ~ 100%
Smallpox, Variola major, malignant (flat) or hemorrhagic types ~ 95%
Smallpox, Variola major, in pregnant women > 65%
Smallpox, Variola major, unvaccinated 30%
Typhoid fever, untreated 10-20%
Smallpox, Variola major, vaccinated 3%
Smallpox, Variola minor, unvaccinated 1%
Typhoid fever < 1%

(Values for Variola major, unvaccinated / vaccinated might be wrong.)

Possible alternative layout
Disease vaccinated CFR unvaccinated CFR treated CFR untreated CFR
Rabies ~ 100%
Smallpox, Variola major, malignant (flat) or hemorrhagic types ~ 95%
Smallpox, Variola major, in pregnant women > 65%
Smallpox, Variola major 3% 30%
Typhoid fever 10-20% < 1%
Smallpox, Variola minor 1%

The table has a lot of information that is simply not accessible in its current state, and diseases have values for different conditions should be linked somehow. Another benefit to having more columns is that they can potentially hold more information, and provide instant feedback on what is missing from the table. For instance, there must be data on HIV/AIDS CFRs when treated.

Better alternative layout(?)
Disease vaccinated CFR unvaccinated CFR
treated untreated treated untreated
Rabies ~ 100%
Smallpox, Variola major, malignant (flat) or hemorrhagic types ~ 95%
Smallpox, Variola major, in pregnant women > 65%
Smallpox, Variola major 3% 30%
Typhoid fever < 1% 10-20%
Smallpox, Variola minor 1%

As you can see, this would force clarity into much of the data (eg. whether or not the data for pregnant women was vaccinated or not). However, with treatment columns as well as vaccination, there would likely end up several columns that would be mostly empty. Also, having vaccinated or unvaccinated columns implies to some extent that everything can be vaccinated. Having subcolumns makes this worse, as everything is forced to take a value, and it's not clear whether vaccinated or unvaccinated is the default for the current values.

For the record, variables include:

  • Treated, untreated
  • Vaccinated, or not
  • ages, or adults vs children vs infants (eg. pertussis, Hep A, chickenpox)
  • types (eg. anthrax infection types)
  • other info (eg. smallpox in pregnant women)

I'd really appreciate some commentary from others if others have any ideas. — Harry (talk) 20:19, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I think this is all unnecessary. Just click the sort button to the right of the "Disease" heading & all five "Smallpox" entries come together, both "Typhoid fever" entries come together, etc, etc... Valerius Tygart (talk) 17:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Major Depressive Disorder[edit]

I have removed Major depressive disorder ("CFR: ~ 15% [1]) mostly because depression is not a disease. The source provided (listed above) was rather dubious, as it consisted of a short clip of someone saying that the fatality rate is "approximately fifteen percent". I'm sure there are better sources, but the listing of something like depression in this article doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I wouldn't be against it being noted below the table though, if people would prefer that, as I think it is perhaps useful for comparison. Please respond with reasoning before returning it to the list. — Harry (talk) 05:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Why do you say that depression is not a disease? It is listed as F32/33 on the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and as #3589 in the Diseases Database. It is routinely listed on "Global Burden of Disease" aggregations. Valerius Tygart (talk) 17:48, 23 October 2014 (UTC)


  1. ^ Dr. Jon Lieberman, DNA Learning Center "Depression - Mortality"

Infectious diseases only[edit]

As at 6 October 2014, all entries in the table were for infectious diseases (virus, bacterial, protozoan, prion etc.) bar one: abdominal aortic aneurysm. I think it's odd to have a list of CFRs that includes both infectious and non-infectious conditions, especially if the non-infectious conditions don't include the most common causes of death such as other cardiovascular conditions and cancer. For this reason I have removed abdominal aortic aneurysm from the list and added a note to the effect that the list only includes infectious diseases. miracleworker5263 (talk) 20:07, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Desire for additional sources[edit]

The claimed 100% Clinical Fatality Rate of the first few diseases comes from the same reference entitled "My List of the Five Deadliest Communicable Diseases", which isn't verifiable to other readers. I suggest we ought to provide more supportive sources to that. I tried to collect them on the main articles but failed as the statistics are highly inconsistent there.