ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2021
Generalized additive regression for group testing data.
Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiple Summary Knowledge-Based Disease Prevalence Estimation for Group Testing Data.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Bayesian Additive Regression Trees for Group Testing Data.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Regression analysis of group-tested current status data.Biometrika · 2024Article
- Bayesian group testing regression models for spatial data.Spatial and spatio-temporal epidemiology · 2024Article
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
In screening applications involving low-prevalence diseases, pooling specimens (e.g., urine, blood, swabs, etc.) through group testing can be far more cost effective than testing specimens individually. Estimation is a common goal in such applications and typically involves modeling the probability of disease as a function of available covariates. In recent years, several authors have developed regression methods to accommodate the complex structure of group testing data but often under the assumption that covariate effects are linear. Although linearity is a reasonable assumption in some applications, it can lead to model misspecification and biased inference in others. To offer a more flexible framework, we propose a Bayesian generalized additive regression approach to model the individual-level probability of disease with potentially misclassified group testing data. Our approach can be used to analyze data arising from any group testing protocol with the goal of estimating multiple unknown smooth functions of covariates, standard linear effects for other covariates, and assay classification accuracy probabilities. We illustrate the methods in this article using group testing data on chlamydia infection in Iowa.
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.