ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2018
Model-based estimation of superinfection prevalence from limited datasets.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A review of HSV pathogenesis, vaccine development, and advanced applications.Molecular biomedicine · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Humans can be infected sequentially by different strains of the same virus. Estimating the prevalence of so-called 'superinfection' for a particular pathogen is vital because superinfection implies a failure of immunologic memory against a given virus despite past exposure, which may signal challenges for future vaccine development. Increasingly, viral deep sequencing and phylogenetic inference can discriminate distinct strains within a host. Yet, a population-level study may misrepresent the true prevalence of superinfection for several reasons. First, certain infections such as herpes simplex virus (HSV-2) only reactivate single strains, making multiple samples necessary to detect superinfection. Second, the number of samples collected in a study may be fewer than the actual number of independently acquired strains within a single person. Third, detecting strains that are relatively less abundant can be difficult, even for other infections such as HIV-1 where deep sequencing may identify multiple strains simultaneously. Here we develop a model of superinfection inspired by ecology. We define an infected individual's richness as the number of infecting strains and use ecological evenness to quantify the relative strain abundances. The model uses an EM methodology to infer the true prevalence of superinfection from limited clinical datasets. Simulation studies with known true prevalence are used to contrast our EM method to a standard (naive) calculation. While varying richness, evenness and sampling we quantify the accuracy and precision of our method. The EM method outperforms in all cases, particularly when sampling is low, and richness or unevenness is high. Here, sensitivity to our assumptions about clinical data is considered. The simulation studies also provide insight into optimal study designs; estimates of prevalence improve equally by enrolling more participants or gathering more samples per person. Finally, we apply our method to data from published studies of HSV-2 and HIV-1 superinfection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.