Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41021657›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

Generalizing population RT-qPCR cycle threshold values-informed estimation of epidemiological dynamics: Impact of surveillance practices and pathogen variability.

Yun Lin, James A Hay, Yu Meng, Benjamin J Cowling, Bingyi Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Yun LinWHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.ORCID 0009-0005-4826-806X
James A HayPandemic Sciences Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Yu MengWHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Benjamin J CowlingWHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
Bingyi YangWHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0811-8332

Funding

Health Bureau of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative RegionResearch Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Population-level viral load distributions, measured by RT-qPCR or qPCR cycle threshold (Ct) values from surveillance testing, can be used to estimate the time-varying reproductive number ([Formula: see text]) in real-time during COVID-19 outbreaks. However, it remains unclear whether this approach can be broadly applied to other pathogens, sources of virologic test data, or surveillance strategies beyond those specifically implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic in Hong Kong. We systematically evaluated the accuracy of Ct-based [Formula: see text] estimates using simulated epidemics under different surveillance testing systems and pathogen viral kinetics. Using area under the ROC curve (AUC) to assess accuracy in detecting epidemic growth or decline, we found that case ascertainment rates minimally impacted estimation accuracy, except when detection was heavily biased towards severe patients (AUC: 0.64, 95% CIs: 0.59 - 0.71) or during prolonged waves with stable [Formula: see text] near one (AUC: 0.54, 0.48 - 0.64), compared to stable detection patterns over time (AUC 0.76, 0.66 - 0.82). By comparing model accuracies across different viral shedding patterns and by parameterizing our model using data from six respiratory pathogens, we found that model performance largely depends on a monotonic viral shedding trajectory following case detection. A pathogen that lacks such shedding pattern - for example, those with a viral peak after onset - exhibited lower accuracy (AUC: 0.58, 0.49 - 0.65). Overall, our findings demonstrate that Ct-based [Formula: see text] estimation methods are generally accurate across diverse surveillance conditions and pathogen shedding patterns, supporting their practical use as a supplementary tool for timely transmission monitoring while highlighting limitations that warrant further consideration.

Indexed as

COVID-19Disease OutbreaksReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSARS-CoV-2Viral LoadVirus SheddingEpidemiological MonitoringGenetic VariationHong KongSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID41021657
PMCPMC12571249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.