Increasing testing throughput and case detection with a pooled-sample Bayesian approach in the context of COVID-19
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Rapid and widespread implementation of infectious disease surveillance is a critical component in the response to novel health threats. Molecular assays are the preferred method to detect a broad range of pathogens with high sensitivity and specificity. The implementation of molecular assay testing in a rapidly evolving public health emergency can be hindered by resource availability or technical constraints. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the applicability of a pooled-sample testing protocol to screen large populations more rapidly and with limited resources is discussed. A Bayesian inference analysis in which hierarchical testing stages can have different sensitivities is implemented and benchmarked against early COVID-19 testing data. Optimal pool size and increases in throughput and case detection are calculated as a function of disease prevalence. Even for moderate losses in test sensitivity upon pooling, substantial increases in testing throughput and detection efficiency are predicted, suggesting that sample pooling is a viable avenue to circumvent current testing bottlenecks for COVID-19.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.03.024216: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.04.03.024216: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No funding statement was detected.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-