ArticleEpidemics2022
Optimizing prevalence estimates for a novel pathogen by reducing uncertainty in test characteristics.
Article in Epidemics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2023Article
- Article
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
Abstract
Emergence of a novel pathogen drives the urgent need for diagnostic tests that can aid in defining disease prevalence. The limitations associated with rapid development and deployment of these tests result in a dilemma: In efforts to optimize prevalence estimates, would tests be better used in the lab to reduce uncertainty in test characteristics or to increase sample size in field studies? Here, we provide a framework to address this question through a joint Bayesian model that simultaneously analyzes lab validation and field survey data, and we define the impact of test allocation on inferences of sensitivity, specificity, and prevalence. In many scenarios, prevalence estimates can be most improved by apportioning additional effort towards validation rather than to the field. The joint model provides superior estimation of prevalence, sensitivity, and specificity, compared with typical analyses that model lab and field data separately, and it can be used to inform sample allocation when testing is limited.
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.