ArticleIEEE transactions on signal processing : a publication of the IEEE Signal Processing Society2021
Heterogeneity Aware Two-Stage Group Testing.
Article in IEEE transactions on signal processing : a publication of the IEEE Signal Processing Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of a Microfluidic Point-of-Care Platform for HPV Detection Based on Helicase-Dependent Amplification.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
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
Group testing refers to the process of testing pooled samples to reduce the total number of tests. Given the current pandemic, and the shortage of test supplies for COVID-19, group testing can play a critical role in time and cost efficient diagnostics. In many scenarios, samples collected from users are also accompanied with auxiliary information (such as demographics, history of exposure, onset of symptoms). Such auxiliary information may differ across patients, and is typically not considered while designing group testing algorithms. In this paper, we abstract such heterogeneity using a model where the population can be categorized into clusters with different prevalence rates. The main result of this work is to show that exploiting knowledge heterogeneity can further improve the efficiency of group testing. Motivated by the practical constraints and diagnostic considerations, we focus on two-stage group testing algorithms, where in the first stage, the goal is to detect as many negative samples by pooling, whereas the second stage involves individual testing to detect any remaining samples. For this class of algorithms, we prove that the gain in efficiency is related to the concavity of the number of tests as a function of the prevalence. We also show how one can choose the optimal pooling parameters for one of the algorithms in this class, namely, doubly constant pooling. We present lower bounds on the average number of tests as a function of the population heterogeneity profile, and also provide numerical results and comparisons.
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.