ArticleHealth services & outcomes research methodology2022
Application of pooled testing in estimating the prevalence of COVID-19.
Article in Health services & outcomes research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Gill Transcriptomics Reveals Unresolved Inflammation Under Chronic Hypoxia and Molecular Plasticity During Cyclic Hypoxia inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Optimizing campus-wide COVID-19 test notifications with interpretable wastewater time-series features using machine learning models.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Evaluation of efficiency and sensitivity of 1D and 2D sample pooling strategies for SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR screening purposes.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in Upper Respiratory Swap Samples by Pooling MethodBalkan medical journal · 2022Article
- Considerations for Pooled Testing of Employees for SARS-CoV-2.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2021Article
- Situation of India in the COVID-19 Pandemic: India's Initial Pandemic Experience.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
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
Testing at a mass scale has been widely accepted as an effective way to contain the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Virus. In the initial stages, the shortage of test kits severely restricted mass-scale testing. Pooled testing was offered as a partial solution to this problem. However, it is a relatively lesser-known fact that pooled testing can also result in significant gains, both in terms of cost savings as well as measurement accuracy, in prevalence estimation surveys. We review here the statistical theory of pooled testing for screening as well as for prevalence estimation. We study the impact of the diagnostic errors, and misspecification of the sensitivity and the specificity on the performances of the pooled as well as individual testing procedures. Our investigation clarifies some of the issues hotly debated in the context of COVID-19 and shows the potential gains for the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) in using a pooled sampling for their upcoming COVID-19 prevalence surveys.
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.