Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35966127›Full record

ArticleInformatics in medicine unlocked2022

Modeling the optimization of COVID-19 pooled testing: How many samples can be included in a single test?

Lu Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Informatics in medicine unlocked, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Lu LiuSchool of Economics, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: This study tries to answer the crucial question of how many biological samples can be optimally included in a single test for COVID-19 pooled testing. Methods: It builds a novel theoretical model which links the local population to be tested in a region, the number of biological samples included in a single test, the "attitude" toward resource cost saving and time taken in a single test, as well as the corresponding resource cost function and time function, together. The numerical simulation results are then used to formulate the resource cost function as well as the time function. Finally, a loss function to be minimized is constructed and the optimal number of samples included is calculated. Results: In a numerical example, we consider a region of 1 million population which needs to be tested for the infection of COVID-19. The solution calculates the optimal number of biological samples included in a single test as Conclusions: As we can see in our simulation results, given the infection probability at 10%, setting the number of biological samples included in a single test (in the integer level) at [4,6] is reasonable for a wide range of the subjective attitude between time and resource costs. Therefore, in the current practice, 5-mixed samples would sound better than the commonly used 10-mixed samples.

Indexed as

COVID-19Machine learningPooled testingResource cost functionTime function

Identifiers

PMID35966127
PMCPMC9357440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.