On an optimal testing strategy for workplace settings operating during the COVID-19 pandemic
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
High quality daily testing for the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 in workplace settings has become part of the standard and mandatory protection measures implemented widely in response to the current pandemic. Such tests are often limited to a small fraction of the attending personnel due to cost considerations, limited availability and processing capabilities and the often cumbersome requirements of the test itself. A maximally efficient use of such an important and frequently scarce resource is clearly required. We here present an optimal testing strategy which minimises the presence of pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic infected members of the population in a workplace setting, derived under a series of simplifying statistical assumptions. These assumptions however, retain many of the generalities of the problem and yield robust results, as verified through a number of numerical simulations. We show that reduction in overall infected-person-days, IPD, by significant percentages can be achieved, for fixed numbers of tests per day of 5% and 10% of the population, of 30% and 50% in the IPD numbers, respectively.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.22.20248752: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. 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 …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.12.22.20248752: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. 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.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
