Prevalence assessment adjusted for laboratory test performance using an example of the COVID-19 serological tests
- 作者: Krieger E.1,2, Grjibovski A.1,3,4,5, Postoev V.1
-
隶属关系:
- Northern State Medical University
- UiT — The Arctic University of Norway
- West Kazakhstan Marat Ospanov Medical University
- Al-Farabi Kazakh National University
- North-Eastern Federal University
- 期: 卷 29, 编号 5 (2022)
- 页面: 301-309
- 栏目: REVIEWS
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/1728-0869/article/view/108116
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/humeco108116
- ID: 108116
如何引用文章
全文:
详细
Assessment of the prevalence of the disease or condition should consider the accuracy of the diagnostic tests. In the context of the new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) pandemic, laboratory testing has been one of the most important components of the overall strategy for the control and prevention of this infection. Seroprevalence studies have been used to assess and monitor the level of population immunity to the virus.
In this paper we provide detailed description of the methods to calculate and interpret the accuracy of laboratory tests as well as their sensitivity, specificity, positive- and negative prognostic values of laboratory tests using seroprevalence of COVID-19 studies as an example for better understanding of the methodological issues. The use of the laboratory tests accuracy in prevalence studies has been demonstrated. A sample syntax to calculate confidence intervals for the prevalence estimates using the bootstrap procedure with known absolute values of true positive and true negative results, false positive and false negative results for R software is also provided. Presentation of the prevalence estimates adjusted for test performance indicators with confidence intervals improves comparability of the findings obtained using different serological tests.
The article is intended for undergraduate-, postgraduate-, and doctoral students in health sciences working with the assessment of the prevalence (seroprevalence) of diseases or conditions through population-based serological surveys.
作者简介
Ekaterina Krieger
Northern State Medical University; UiT — The Arctic University of Norway
编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: kate-krieger@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5179-5737
SPIN 代码: 2686-7226
Cand.Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor
俄罗斯联邦, Arkhangelsk; Tromso, NorwayAndrej Grjibovski
Northern State Medical University; West Kazakhstan Marat Ospanov Medical University; Al-Farabi Kazakh National University; North-Eastern Federal University
Email: andrej.grjibovski@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5464-0498
SPIN 代码: 5118-0081
Dr. Med.
俄罗斯联邦, Arkhangelsk; Aktobe, Republic of Kazakhstan; Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan; YakutskVitaly Postoev
Northern State Medical University
Email: ispha@nsmu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4982-4169
SPIN 代码: 6070-2486
PhD, Cand. Sci (Med)
俄罗斯联邦, Arkhangelsk参考
- Institut po izmereniju pokazatelej zdorov'ja i ocenke sostojanija zdorov'ja (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation), Set' chelovecheskogo razvitija (Human Development Network), Vsemirnyj bank (The World Bank). Global'noe bremja boleznej (Global Burden of Disease): porozhdenie dokazatel'stv napravlenie politiki — regional'noe izdanie dlja Evropy i Central'noj Azii. Seattle, WA: IHME; 2013. (In Russ). URL: https://www.healthdata.org/sites/default/files/files/policy_report/2013/WB_EuropeCentralAsia/IHME_GBD_WorldBank_EuropeCentralAsia_FullReport_RUSSIAN.pdf
- Byambasuren O, Dobler CC, Bell K, et al. Comparison of seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections with cumulative and imputed COVID-19 cases: Systematic review. PloS one. 2021;16(4):e0248946. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248946
- Moshkin AV. Sensitivity and specificity as clinical indicators of laboratory quality. Laboratornaya sluzhba. 2020;9(4):5-6. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17116/labs202090415
- World Health Organization. Laboratory testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in suspected human cases: interim guidance: 2 March 2020. URL: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/331329
- Krajewski R, Gołębiowska J, Makuch S, et al. Update on serologic testing in COVID-19. Clin Chim Acta. 2020;510:746-750. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2020.09.015
- YangY, Yang M, Shen C, et al. Evaluating the accuracy of different respiratory specimens in the laboratory diagnosis and monitoring the viral shedding of2019–nCoV infections, 2020. MedRxiv. Preprint 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.02.11.20021493
- Barchuk A, Shirokov D, Sergeeva M, et al. Evaluation of the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays for a longitudinal population-based study of COVID-19 spread in St. Petersburg, Russia. Journal of medical virology. 2021;93(10):5846-5852. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27126
- Kuvshinova IN, Nekrasov BG, Livitskaya NI, et al. Chuvstvitel'nost' i spetsifichnost' naborov reagentov AO «Vektor-Best» dlya vyyavleniya immunoglobulinov raznykh klassov k SARS-CoV-2. Spravochnik zaveduyushchego KDL. 2020;(10):27-32. (In Russ).
- Zhao J, Yuan Q, Wang H, et al. Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019. MedRxiv. Preprint 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.03.02.20030189
- Lou B, Li TD, Zheng SF, et al. Serology characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection since the exposure and post symptoms onset. MedRxiv. Preprint 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.03.23.20041707
- Cohen AN, Kessel B. False positives in reverse transcription PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2. MedRxiv. Preprint 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.04.26.20080911
- Glas AS, Lijmer JG, Prins MH, Bonsel GJ, Bossuyt PM. The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(11):1129-1135. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(03)00177-х
- Fanshawe TR, Power M, Graziadio S, et al. Interactive visualisation for interpreting diagnostic test accuracy study results. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2018;23(1):13-16. doi: 10.1136/ebmed-2017-110862
- Leeflang MM, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Hooft L, Bossuyt PM. Variation of a test's sensitivity and specificity with disease prevalence. CMAJ. 2013;185(11):E537-E544. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.121286
- Meyer MJ, Yan S, Schlageter S, Kraemer JD, Rosenberg ES, Stoto MA. Adjusting COVID-19 Seroprevalence Survey Results to Account for Test Sensitivity and Specificity. Am J Epidemiol. 2022; 191(4):681-688. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwab273
- Sempos CT, Tian L. Adjusting Coronavirus prevalence estimates for laboratory test kit error. MedRxiv. Preprint 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.05.11.20098202
- Lewis FI, Torgerson PR. A tutorial in estimating the prevalence of disease in humans and animals in the absence of a gold standarddiagnostic. Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2012;9(1):9. doi: 10.1186/1742-7622-9-9
- Bendavid E, Mulaney B, Sood N, et al. COVID-19 antibody seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California. Int J Epidemiol. 2021;50(2):410-419. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyab010
- Uyoga S, Adetifa IMO, Karanja HK, et al. Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in Kenyan blood donors. Science. 2021;371(6524):79-82. doi: 10.1126/science.abe1916
- Stringhini S, Wisniak A, Piumatti G, et al. Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in Geneva, Switzerland (SEROCoV-POP): a population-based study. Lancet. 2020;396(10247):313-319. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31304-0
- Diggle PJ.Estimating prevalence using an imperfect test. Epidemiology Research International. 2011. doi: 10.1155/2011/608719