Literature DB >> 20046956

Bias, efficiency, and agreement for group-testing regression models.

Christopher R Bilder1, Joshua M Tebbs.   

Abstract

Group testing involves pooling individual items together and testing them simultaneously for a rare binary trait. Whether the goal is to estimate the prevalence of the trait or to identify those individuals that possess it, group testing can provide substantial benefits when compared to testing subjects individually. Recently, group-testing regression models have been proposed as a way to incorporate covariates when estimating trait prevalence. In this paper, we examine these models by comparing fits obtained from individual and group testing samples. Relative bias and efficiency measures are used to assess the accuracy and precision of the resulting estimates using different grouping strategies. We also investigate the agreement of individual and group-testing regression estimates for various grouping strategies and the effects of group size selection. Depending on how groups are formed, our results show that group-testing regression models can perform very well when compared to the analogous models based on individual observations. However, different grouping strategies can provide very different results in finite samples.

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 20046956      PMCID: PMC2744319          DOI: 10.1080/00949650701608990

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Stat Comput Simul        ISSN: 0094-9655            Impact factor:   1.424


  24 in total

1.  Regression models for disease prevalence with diagnostic tests on pools of serum samples.

Authors:  S Vansteelandt; E Goetghebeur; T Verstraeten
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Bayesian analysis of prevalence with covariates using simulation-based techniques: applications to HIV screening.

Authors:  X M Tu; J Kowalski; G Jia
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1999-11-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Using group testing to estimate a proportion, and to test the binomial model.

Authors:  C L Chen; W H Swallow
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Utility of pooled urine specimens for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in men attending public sexually transmitted infection clinics in Mumbai, India, by PCR.

Authors:  Christina Lindan; Meenakshi Mathur; Sameer Kumta; Hermangi Jerajani; Alka Gogate; Julius Schachter; Jeanne Moncada
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Important experimental parameters for determining infection rates in arthropod vectors using pool screening approaches.

Authors:  Charles R Katholi; Thomas R Unnasch
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.345

6.  Pooling in systems biology becomes smart.

Authors:  Nicolas Thierry-Mieg
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 28.547

7.  Sampling for the incidence of aphid-transmitted viruses in snap bean.

Authors:  Denis A Shah; Helene R Dillard; Brian A Nault
Journal:  Phytopathology       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.025

8.  Pooling sera to reduce the cost of HIV surveillance: a feasibility study in a rural Kenyan district.

Authors:  T Verstraeten; B Farah; L Duchateau; R Matu
Journal:  Trop Med Int Health       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 2.622

9.  The use of a square array scheme in blood testing.

Authors:  R M Phatarfod; A Sudbury
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1994-11-30       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Prevalence of antibodies to hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and HIV and risk factors in Irish prisoners: results of a national cross sectional survey.

Authors:  S Allwright; F Bradley; J Long; J Barry; L Thornton; J V Parry
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-07-08
View more
  9 in total

1.  Estimating covariate-adjusted measures of diagnostic accuracy based on pooled biomarker assessments.

Authors:  Christopher S McMahan; Alexander C McLain; Colin M Gallagher; Enrique F Schisterman
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2016-03-01       Impact factor: 2.207

2.  Informative Retesting.

Authors:  Christopher R Bilder; Joshua M Tebbs; Peng Chen
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 5.033

3.  Group testing regression models with fixed and random effects.

Authors:  Peng Chen; Joshua M Tebbs; Christopher R Bilder
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Group testing regression models with dilution submodels.

Authors:  Md S Warasi; Christopher S McMahan; Joshua M Tebbs; Christopher R Bilder
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Global goodness-of-fit tests for group testing regression models.

Authors:  Peng Chen; Joshua M Tebbs; Christopher R Bilder
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Regression analysis for multiple-disease group testing data.

Authors:  Boan Zhang; Christopher R Bilder; Joshua M Tebbs
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  Nonparametric estimation of distributions and diagnostic accuracy based on group-tested results with differential misclassification.

Authors:  Wei Zhang; Aiyi Liu; Qizhai Li; Paul S Albert
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 1.701

8.  Determination of Varying Group Sizes for Pooling Procedure.

Authors:  Wenjun Xiong; Hongyu Lu; Juan Ding
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 2.238

9.  Estimating HIV prevalence from surveys with low individual consent rates: annealing individual and pooled samples.

Authors:  Lauren Hund; Marcello Pagano
Journal:  Emerg Themes Epidemiol       Date:  2013-02-27
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.