» Articles » PMID: 29422690

Misclassified Group-tested Current Status Data

Overview
Journal Biometrika
Specialty Public Health
Date 2018 Feb 10
PMID 29422690
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Group testing, introduced by Dorfman (1943), has been used to reduce costs when estimating the prevalence of a binary characteristic based on a screening test of [Formula: see text] groups that include [Formula: see text] independent individuals in total. If the unknown prevalence is low and the screening test suffers from misclassification, it is also possible to obtain more precise prevalence estimates than those obtained from testing all [Formula: see text] samples separately (Tu et al., 1994). In some applications, the individual binary response corresponds to whether an underlying time-to-event variable [Formula: see text] is less than an observed screening time [Formula: see text], a data structure known as current status data. Given sufficient variation in the observed [Formula: see text] values, it is possible to estimate the distribution function [Formula: see text] of [Formula: see text] nonparametrically, at least at some points in its support, using the pool-adjacent-violators algorithm (Ayer et al., 1955). Here, we consider nonparametric estimation of [Formula: see text] based on group-tested current status data for groups of size [Formula: see text] where the group tests positive if and only if any individual's unobserved [Formula: see text] is less than the corresponding observed [Formula: see text]. We investigate the performance of the group-based estimator as compared to the individual test nonparametric maximum likelihood estimator, and show that the former can be more precise in the presence of misclassification for low values of [Formula: see text]. Potential applications include testing for the presence of various diseases in pooled samples where interest focuses on the age-at-incidence distribution rather than overall prevalence. We apply this estimator to the age-at-incidence curve for hepatitis C infection in a sample of U.S. women who gave birth to a child in 2014, where group assignment is done at random and based on maternal age. We discuss connections to other work in the literature, as well as potential extensions.

Citing Articles

Regression analysis of group-tested current status data.

Li S, Hu T, Wang L, McMahan C, Tebbs J Biometrika. 2024; 111(3):1047-1061.

PMID: 39691693 PMC: 11648127. DOI: 10.1093/biomet/asae006.


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

Zhang W, Liu A, Li Q, Albert P Biometrics. 2020; 76(4):1147-1156.

PMID: 32083733 PMC: 8581970. DOI: 10.1111/biom.13236.


Incorporating retesting outcomes for estimation of disease prevalence.

Zhang W, Liu A, Li Q, Albert P Stat Med. 2019; 39(6):687-697.

PMID: 31758594 PMC: 8856765. DOI: 10.1002/sim.8439.


Natural history of diseases: Statistical designs and issues.

Jewell N Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016; 100(4):353-61.

PMID: 27393601 PMC: 5017909. DOI: 10.1002/cpt.423.

References
1.
Vansteelandt S, Goetghebeur E, Verstraeten T . Regression models for disease prevalence with diagnostic tests on pools of serum samples. Biometrics. 2000; 56(4):1126-33. DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.01126.x. View

2.
Tu X, Litvak E, Pagano M . Studies of AIDS and HIV surveillance. Screening tests: can we get more by doing less?. Stat Med. 1994; 13(19-20):1905-19. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780131904. View

3.
Maathuis M, Hudgens M . Nonparametric inference for competing risks current status data with continuous, discrete or grouped observation times. Biometrika. 2012; 98(2):325-340. PMC: 3372275. DOI: 10.1093/biomet/asq083. View

4.
Wahed M, Chowdhury D, Nermell B, Khan S, Ilias M, Rahman M . A modified routine analysis of arsenic content in drinking-water in Bangladesh by hydride generation-atomic absorption spectrophotometry. J Health Popul Nutr. 2006; 24(1):36-41. View

5.
Liu A, Liu C, Zhang Z, Albert P . Optimality of group testing in the presence of misclassification. Biometrika. 2012; 99(1):245-251. PMC: 3412609. DOI: 10.1093/biomet/asr064. View