3 ms·
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_association_footballers_who_died_while_playing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_association_footballer... 21 in 20
by daenz 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_association_footballers_who_died_while_playing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_association_footballer...
21 in 2021
3 in 2020
3 in 2019
4 in 2018
7 in 2017
8 in 2016
9 in 2015
5 in 2014
10 in 2013
8 in 2012
3 in 2011
9 in 2010
Something is different about 2021. I'm not a data analyst, but maybe somebody can quantify how 2021 is an outlier.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- 542458 5y agoThat’s not a complete list for any year, so comparisons of counts is meaningless - again, lots of room for biases to creep in here.
- daenz 5y ago>comparisons of counts is meaningless Even if the data is biased, it's still useful when you account for the biases. What are you proposing is the bias for 2021?
- 542458 5y agoA potential bias for 2021 would be that: In 2021 some people are worried about a vaccine->heart link and for any given event may be more likely to document it online and/or add it to Wikipedia. As such we might not be measuring number of cardiac arrests, and actually may be measuring public attention paid to cardiac arrest.
- daenz 5y agoWhat test could prove or disprove that hypothesis? Creating some criteria by which to include a death in the statistic? (eg, notability)
- 542458 5y agoNotability is sort of a bad metric since it’s incredibly subjective. And we’re not just worried about extraneous inclusions in 2021, we’re also concerned about missing data points for previous years - there’s no real statistical correction for “my inputs are biased in unknown ways”. You need to do real analyses with better quality data (i.e., national death registries) to find a ground truth to compare to. But good news, since this is quite a hot topic I’d expect that people are already looking into that.