Abstract
We present a two-stage group testing model for the detection of viruses in blood samples in the presence of random window periods. As usual, if a tested group is found to be positive, all its members are treated individually. The groups that were tested negative return for a second round after a certain time, new blood samples are taken and tested after pooling. The given system parameters are the size of the population to be screened, the incidence rates of the infections, the probability distributions of the lengths of the window periods, and the costs of group tests. The objective is to minimize the expected cost of running the system, which is composed of the cost of the conducted group tests and penalties on delayed test results and on misclassifications (noninfected persons declared to be positive and, more importantly, persons whose infections have not been identified). By an appropriate choice of the group size and the waiting time for the second round of testings one wants to optimize the various trade-offs involved. We derive in closed form all the probabilistic quantities occurring in the objective function and the constraints. Several numerical examples are given. The model is also extended to the case of several types of viruses with different window periods.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bar-Lev SK, Boneh A, Perry D (1990) Incomplete identification models for group-testable items. Nav Res Logist 37:647–659
Bar-Lev SK, Stadje W, Van der Duyn Schouten FA (2004) Multinomial group testing models with incomplete identification. J Stat Plan Inference 135:384–401
Bar-Lev SK, Stadje W, Van der Duyn Schouten FA (2006) Group testing procedures with incomplete identification and unreliable testing results. Appl Stoch Models Bus Ind 22:281–296
Du D-Z, Hwang FK (2000) Combinatorial group testing and its applications, 2nd edn. World Scientific, Singapore
Gastwirth JL, Johnson WO (1994) Screening with cost-effective quality control: potential applications to HIV and drug testing. J Am Stat Assoc 89:972–981
Hammick PA, Gastwirth JL (1994) Group testing for sensitive characteristics: extension to higher prevalence levels. Int Stat Rev 62:319–331
Hanson TE, Johnson WO, Gastwirth JL (2006) Bayesian inference for prevalence and diagnostic test accuracy based on dual-pooled screening. Biostatistics 7:41–57
Johnson WO, Gastwirth JL (2000) Dual group screening. J Stat Plan Inference 83:449–473
Litvak E, Tu XM, Pagano M (1994) Screening for the presence of a disease by pooling sera samples. J Am Stat Assoc 89:424–434
Macula AJ (1999a) Probabilistic nonadaptive group testing in the presence of errors and DNA library screening. Ann Comb 3:61–69
Macula AJ (1999b) Probabilistic nonadaptive and two-stage group testing with relatively small pools and DNA library screening. J Comb Optim 2:385–397
Monzon OT, Paladin FJE, Dimaandal E, Balis AM, Samson C, Mitchell S (1991) Relevance of antibody content and test format in HIV testing of pooled sera. AIDS 6:43–47
Sobel M, Groll PA (1959) Group testing to eliminate efficiently all defectives in a binomial sample. Bell Syst Tech J 28:1179–1252
Tu XM, Litvak E, Pagano M (1995) On the informativeness and accuracy of pooled testing in estimating prevalence of a rare disease: application to HIV screening. Biometrika 82:287–297
Uhl G, Liu Q, Walther D, Hess J, Naiman D (2001) Polysubstance abuse-vulnerability genes: genome scans for association using 1,004 subjects and 1,494 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Am J Hum Gene 69:1290–1300
Wein LM, Zenios SA (1996) Pooled testing for HIV screening: capturing the dilution effect. Oper Res 44:543–569
Wolf J (1985) Born again group testing: multiaccess communications. IEEE Trans Inf Theory IT31:185–191
Zhu L, Hughes-Oliver J, Young S (2001) Statistical decoding of potent pools based on chemical structure. Biometrics 57:922–930
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bar-Lev, S.K., Boxma, O., Stadje, W. et al. A Two-Stage Group Testing Model for Infections with Window Periods. Methodol Comput Appl Probab 12, 309–322 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11009-008-9104-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11009-008-9104-4