ArticlePloS one2024
A joint penalized spline smoothing model for the number of positive and negative COVID-19 tests.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the key tools to understand and reduce the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is testing. The total number of tests, the number of positive tests, the number of negative tests, and the positivity rate are interconnected indicators and vary with time. To better understand the relationship between these indicators, against the background of an evolving pandemic, the association between the number of positive tests and the number of negative tests is studied using a joint modeling approach. All countries in the European Union, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Norway are included in the analysis. We propose a joint penalized spline model in which the penalized spline is reparameterized as a linear mixed model. The model allows for flexible trajectories by smoothing the country-specific deviations from the overall penalized spline and accounts for heteroscedasticity by allowing the autocorrelation parameters and residual variances to vary among countries. The association between the number of positive tests and the number of negative tests is derived from the joint distribution for the random intercepts and slopes. The correlation between the random intercepts and the correlation between the random slopes were both positive. This suggests that, when countries increase their testing capacity, both the number of positive tests and negative tests will increase. A significant correlation was found between the random intercepts, but the correlation between the random slopes was not significant due to a wide credible interval.
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.