Misclassification errors in prevalence estimation: Bayesian handling with care
- 414 Downloads
This Hints and Kinks paper starts from the simple but well-known premise that “what gets measured, gets done”, which we would like to extend into “what gets measured well, gets done well”, and finally to “what does not get measured well could still get done well, if appropriate analytical methods are used”.
Imagine assessing the prevalence of an infectious disease in a population, where the presence of disease is determined by a diagnostic test. For each tested individual, the diagnostic test result gives a “signal” that does not necessarily match its true infection status. It is well known that false positive and false negative results can arise when using diagnostic tests, for example producing a positive result in a non-case owing to a factor unrelated to the infection. On a population level, the prevalence as determined by the diagnostic test will thus only be an “apparent” prevalence, which will, to some extent, differ from the “true” prevalence. This problem of diagnostic test...
KeywordsInfection Status Malaria Prevalence Test Characteristic External Information Positive Test Result
- Bouwknegt M, Engel B, Herremans MMPT, Widdowson MA, Worm HC, Koopmans MPG, Frankena K, De Roda Husman AM, De Jong MCM, Van Der Poel WHM (2008) Bayesian estimation of hepatitis E virus seroprevalence for populations with different exposure levels to swine in The Netherlands. Epidemiol Infect 136:567–576PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Speybroeck N, Praet N, Claes F, Van Hong N, Torres K, Mao S, Van den Eede P, Thi Thinh T, Gamboa D, Sochantha T, Thang ND, Coosemans M, Büscher P, D’Alessandro U, Berkvens D, Erhart A (2011) True versus apparent malaria infection prevalence: the contribution of a Bayesian approach. PLoS ONE 6(2):e16705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Speybroeck N, Williams CJ, Lafia KB, Devleesschauwer B, Berkvens D (2012) Estimating the prevalence of infections in vector populations using pools of samples. Med Vet Entomol 26:361–371Google Scholar