Comparison of methods for estimation of individual-level prevalence based on pooled samples.

We review frequentist and Bayesian approaches for estimating animal-level disease prevalence using pooled samples obtained by simple random sampling. We determine the preferred approach for different prevalence scenarios and with varying knowledge about sensitivity and specificity values. When sensitivity and specificity are perfect or known, we can choose between the large-sample theory estimates and the one-to-one relationship exact estimates. When sensitivity and specificity are unknown, we must use large-sample theory estimates or Bayesian methodology (which gives exact estimates). However, when the large-sample theory produces a negative lower confidence limit, we must use one of the exact methods. We compare estimates from each approach using culture results from pools of 20 eggs from three flocks on a California ranch that were producing eggs that were contaminated with Salmonella enteritidis phage type 4.