ArticleBMC medical research methodology2021
Incorporating and addressing testing bias within estimates of epidemic dynamics for SARS-CoV-2.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Resolving parameter uncertainty in SIR models through population-level serological surveillance: A synthetic study.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2026Article
- Article
- Diagnostic performance of allele-specific RT-qPCR and genomic sequencing in wastewater-based surveillance of SARS-CoV-2.Eco-Environment & Health · 2025Article
- Nowcasting methods to improve the performance of respiratory sentinel surveillance: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Developing scientific literacy with a cyclic independent study assisted CURE detecting SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2023Article
- Article
- Rise and fall of SARS-CoV-2 variants in Rotterdam: Comparison of wastewater and clinical surveillance.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- Exposure to infection when accessing groceries reveals racial and socioeconomic inequities in navigating the pandemic.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Challenges and Opportunities for Global Genomic Surveillance Strategies in the COVID-19 Era.Viruses · 2022Review
- Results from Canton Grisons of Switzerland suggest repetitive testing reduces SARS-CoV-2 incidence (February-March 2021).Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe disease burden of SARS-CoV-2 as measured by tests from various localities, and at different time points present varying estimates of infection and fatality rates. Models based on these acquired data may suffer from systematic errors and large estimation variances due to the biases associated with testing. An unbiased randomized testing to estimate the true fatality rate is still missing.
methodsHere, we characterize the effect of incidental sampling bias in the estimation of epidemic dynamics. Towards this, we explicitly modeled for sampling bias in an augmented compartment model to predict epidemic dynamics. We further calculate the bias from differences in disease prediction from biased, and randomized sampling, proposing a strategy to obtain unbiased estimates.
resultsOur simulations demonstrate that sampling biases in favor of patients with higher disease manifestation could significantly affect direct estimates of infection and fatality rates calculated from the numbers of confirmed cases and deaths, and serological testing can partially mitigate these biased estimates.
conclusionsThe augmented compartmental model allows the explicit modeling of different testing policies and their effects on disease estimates. Our calculations for the dependence of expected confidence on a randomized sample sizes, show that relatively small sample sizes can provide statistically significant estimates for SARS-CoV-2 related death rates.
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.