ArticleEpidemiology and infection2020
Modelling pool testing for SARS-CoV-2: addressing heterogeneity in populations.
Article in Epidemiology and infection, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimization of Screening Strategies for COVID-19: Scoping Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Strategies for Scaling up SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Testing Capacity.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2022Review
- Lessons learned 1 year after SARS-CoV-2 emergence leading to COVID-19 pandemic.Emerging microbes & infections · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Amplifying the testing capacity and making better use of testing resources is a crucial measure when fighting any pandemic. A pooled testing strategy for SARS-CoV-2 has theoretically been shown to increase the testing capacity of a country, especially when applied in low prevalence settings. Experimental studies have shown that the sensitivity of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction is not affected when implemented in small groups. Previous models estimated the optimum group size as a function of the historical prevalence; however, this implies a homogeneous distribution of the disease within the population. This study aimed to explore whether separating individuals by age groups when pooling samples results in any further savings on test kits or affects the optimum group size estimation compared to Dorfman's pooling, based on historical prevalence. For this evaluation, age groups of interest were defined as 0-19 years, 20-59 years and over 60 years old. Generalisation of Dorfman's pooling was performed by adding statistical weight to the age groups based on the number of confirmed cases and tests performed in the segment. The findings showed that when the pooling samples are based on age groups, there is a decrease in the number of tests per subject needed to diagnose one subject. Although this decrease is minuscule, it might account for considerable savings when applied on a large scale. In addition, the savings are considerably higher in settings where there is a high standard deviation among the positivity rate of the age segments of the general population.
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.