ArticleBiometrika2024
Regression analysis of group-tested current status data.
Article in Biometrika, 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
Abstract
Group testing is an effective way to reduce the time and cost associated with conducting large-scale screening for infectious diseases. Benefits are realized through testing pools formed by combining specimens, such as blood or urine, from different individuals. In some studies, individuals are assessed only once and a time-to-event endpoint is recorded, for example, the time until infection. Combining group testing with this type of endpoint results in group-tested current status data (Petito & Jewell, 2016). To analyse these complex data, we propose methods that estimate a proportional hazard regression model based on test outcomes from measuring the pools. A sieve maximum likelihood estimation approach is developed that approximates the cumulative baseline hazard function with a piecewise constant function. To identify the sieve estimator, a computationally efficient expectation-maximization algorithm is derived by using data augmentation. Asymptotic properties of both the parametric and nonparametric components of the sieve estimator are then established by applying modern empirical process theory. Numerical results from simulation studies show that our proposed method performs nominally and has advantages over the corresponding estimation method based on individual testing results. We illustrate our work by analysing a chlamydia dataset collected by the State Hygienic Laboratory at the University of Iowa.
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.