Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Jan 1;79(1):67-80.
doi: 10.1080/00949650701608990.

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

Affiliations

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

Christopher R Bilder et al. J Stat Comput Simul. .

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Model fits for individual and group testing for one simulated data set using different pooling strategies. The covariate is age. Corresponding model estimates are in Table 1.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Values of the slope estimate β̂1 in model (3) for individual and group testing using 100 simulated data sets with different pooling strategies.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Watson M. Factors affecting the amount of infection obtained by aphis transmission of the virus Hy. III. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B. 1936;226:457–489.
    1. Dorfman R. The detection of defective members of large populations. Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 1943;14:436–440.
    1. Cardoso M, Koerner K, Kubanek B. Mini-pool screening by nucleic acid testing for hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and HIV: Preliminary results. Transfusion. 1998;38:905–907. - PubMed
    1. Drosten C, Weber M, Seifried E, Roth W. Evaluation of a new PCR assay with competitive interval control sequence for blood donor screening. Transfusion. 2000;40:718–724. - PubMed
    1. Pfeiffer R, Rutter J, Gail M, Stuewing J, Gastwirth J. Efficiency of DNA pooling to estimate joint allele frequencies and measure linkage disequilibrium. Genetic Epidemiology. 22:94–102. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources