Estimating Prevalence of a Trait

  • Ganapati P. PatilEmail author
  • Sharad D. Gore
  • Charles Taillie*
Part of the Environmental and Ecological Statistics book series (ENES, volume 4)


When sampling units selected from a population and measurements indicate presence or absence of a trait, it is possible to either classify every sampling unit as positive/negative or estimate the prevalence of the trait. The former is desired when the interest is in identifying all sampling units that test positive (and hence possess the trait). The latter is useful when the interest is not in the status of individual sampling units that possess the trait. The problem, then, is to estimate the sampling units in the population that possess the trait, when presence. Absence measurements are obtained on composite samples. Here, the values on the individual sampling units in the population are assumed to be independent and identically distributed random variables.


Composite Sample Maximum Likelihood Estimator Sampling Unit Unbiased Estimator Taylor Series Expansion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Anscombe, F. J. (1956). On estimating binomial response relations. Biometrika 43:461–464.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartlett, M. S. (1935). Mathematical appendix to a paper, by G. E. Blackman, entitled “A study by statistical methods of the distribution of species in grassland associations.” Ann. Bot. 49:749–777.Google Scholar
  3. Boswell, M. T. and Patil, G. P. (1987). A perspective of composite sampling. Commun. Stat. Theor. Methods 16:3069–3093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burrows, P. M. (1987). Improved estimation of pathogen transmission rates by group testing. Phytopathology 77:363–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chiang, C. L. and Reeves, W. C. (1962). Statistical estimation of virus infection rates in mosquito vector populations. Am. J. Hygiene 75:377–391.Google Scholar
  6. Fisher, R. A. (1921). On the mathematical foundations of theoretical statistics. Phil. Trans. (A) 222:309–368.Google Scholar
  7. Garner, F. C., Stapanian, M. A., and Williams, L. R. (1988). Composite sampling for environmental monitoring. In Principles of Environmental Sampling, L. H. Keith, ed. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC. pp. 363–374.Google Scholar
  8. Garner, F. C., Stapanian, M. A., Yfantis, E. A., and Williams, L. R. (1990). Probability estimation with sample compositing techniques. MS.Google Scholar
  9. Gibbs, A. J. and Gower, J. C. (1960). The use of a multiple-transfer method in plant virus transmission studies—some statistical points arising in the analysis of results. Ann. Appl. Biol. 48:75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Griffiths, D. A. (1972). A further note on the probability of disease transmission. Biometrics 28:1133–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haldane, J. B. S. (1955). The estimation and significance of the logarithm of a ratio of frequencies. Ann. Hum. Genet. 20:309–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kerr, J. D. (1971). The probability of disease transmission. Biometrics 27:219–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Loyer, M. W. (1983). Bad probability, good statistics, and group testing for binomial estimation. Am. Stat. 37:57–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sobel, M. and Elashoff, R. M. (1975). Group testing with a new goal, estimation. Biometrika 62:181–193.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Swallow, W. H. (1985). Group testing for estimating infection rates and probabilities of disease transmission. Phytopathology 75:882–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Swallow, W. H. (1987). Relative mean squared error and cost considerations in choosing group size for group testing to estimate infection rates and probabilities of disease transmission. Phytopathology 77:1376–1381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thompson, K. H. (1962). Estimation of the proportion of vectors in a natural population of insects. Biometrics 18:568–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Watson, M. A. (1936). Factors affecting the amount of infection obtained by aphis transmission of the virus Hy. III. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. B. 226:457–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ganapati P. Patil
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sharad D. Gore
    • 2
  • Charles Taillie*
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Statistical Ecology and Environmental StatisticsPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.Department of StatisticsUniversity of PunePuneIndia
  3. 3.Center for Statistical Ecology and Environmental StatisticsPenn State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations