Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Divide & conquer COVID testing strategy #28

Open
fikisipi opened this issue Apr 9, 2020 · 0 comments
Open

Divide & conquer COVID testing strategy #28

fikisipi opened this issue Apr 9, 2020 · 0 comments

Comments

@fikisipi
Copy link

fikisipi commented Apr 9, 2020

What's your opinion on group testing? Here's a math analysis on it:

https://members.loria.fr/ADeleforge/the-maths-of-pool-testing-mixing-samples-to-speed-up-covid-19-detection/

Infection rate ► Initial mini-pool size ▼ 0.5% 1% 2% 3% 5% 8% 10% 20% 50%
2 0.51 0.51 0.53 0.54 0.57 0.62 0.64 0.78 1.12
4 0.26 0.28 0.31 0.34 0.39 0.48 0.53 0.77 1.30
8 0.15 0.17 0.21 0.25 0.33 0.45 0.52 0.82 1.41
16 0.09 0.12 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.46 0.54 0.87 1.47
32 0.07 0.10 0.17 0.23 0.34 0.48 0.57 0.90 1.51

My concerns are:

  • RT-PCR has 60-80% sensitivity which would ruin the predictive value of a branch (as you go up the tree the test outcome affects the final result bits exponentially).
  • Is the lack of sensitivity due to (individual vs mixed sensitivity):
    a. virus RNA doesn't stay in everyone's throat
    b. failure in extraction/probing
  • Can you reliably keep split one patient's sample into N parts where N is the testing tree height? (since max SampleCnt(Patient_i) = N)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant