Back

Group Testing Large Populations for SARS-CoV-2

Zabeti, H.; Dexter, N.; Lau, I.; Unruh, L.; Adcock, B.; Chindelevitch, L.

2021-06-05 epidemiology
10.1101/2021.06.03.21258258 medRxiv
Show abstract

Group testing, the testing paradigm which combines multiple samples within a single test, was introduced in 1943 by Robert Dorfman. Since its original proposal for syphilis screening, group testing has been applied in domains such as fault identification in electrical and computer networks, machine learning, data mining, and cryptography. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has led to proposals for using group testing in its original context of identifying infected individuals in a population with few tests. Studies suggest that non-adaptive group testing - in which all the tests are determined in advance - for SARS-CoV-2 could help save 20% to 90% of tests depending on the prevalence. However, no systematic approach for comparing different non-adaptive group testing strategies currently exists. In this paper we develop a software platform for evaluating non-adaptive group testing strategies in both a noiseless setting and in the presence of realistic noise sources, modelled on published experimental observations, which makes them applicable to polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests, the dominant type of tests for SARS-CoV-2. This modular platform can be used with a variety of group testing designs and decoding algorithms. We use it to evaluate the performance of near-doubly-regular designs and a decoding algorithm based on an integer linear programming formulation, both of which are known to be optimal in some regimes. We find savings between 40% and 91% of tests for prevalences up to 10% when a small error (below 5%) is allowed. We also find that the performance degrades gracefully with noise. We expect our modular, user-friendly, publicly available platform to facilitate empirical research into non-adaptive group testing for SARS-CoV-2.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
22.9%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 18%
10.2%
3
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.0%
4
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 36%
4.0%
5
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.0%
6
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
7
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
8
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.5%
9
Swiss Medical Weekly
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
10
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 10%
2.1%
11
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
32 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
12
Epidemiology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
13
Statistics in Medicine
34 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
14
Physical Review E
95 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
15
Journal of Computational Biology
37 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
16
Genetic Epidemiology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
17
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.4%
18
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
20
Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
Infectious Disease Modelling
50 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
22
Physical Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
23
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
24
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
Journal of the Royal Society Interface
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
26
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
27
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
34 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
The European Physical Journal Plus
13 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.5%
30
Medical Decision Making
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%