Large-scale testing is considered key to assessing the state of the current COVID-19 pandemic, yet interpreting such data remains elusive. We modeled competing hypotheses regarding the underlying testing mechanisms, thereby providing different prevalence estimates based on case numbers, and used them to predict SARS-CoV-2-attributed death rate trajectories. Assuming that individuals were tested based solely on a predefined risk of being infectious implied the absolute case numbers reflected prevalence, but turned out to be a poor predictor. In contrast, models accounting for testing capacity, limiting the pool of tested individuals, performed better. This puts forward the percentage of positive tests as a robust indicator of epidemic dynamics in absence of country-specific information. We next demonstrated this strongly affects data interpretation. Notably absolute case numbers trajectories consistently overestimated growth rates at the beginning of two COVID-19 epidemic waves. Overall, this supports non-trivial testing mechanisms can be inferred from data and should be scrutinized.
翻译:大规模测试被认为是评估当前COVID-19大流行状况的关键,但这些数据仍然难以解释。我们模拟了有关基本测试机制的相互竞争的假设,从而根据病例数提供不同的流行率估计数,并用这些假设预测SARS-COV-2导致的死亡率轨迹。假设仅根据预先确定的感染风险对个人进行测试,就意味着绝对病例数反映流行率,但结果却发现这种绝对病例数反映的流行率,是一个预测力差。相反,测试能力计算模型,限制接受测试的个人,其表现更好。这显示在缺乏具体国家信息的情况下,正测试的百分比是流行病动态的有力指标。我们随后展示了这一点对数据解释的重大影响。值得注意的是,绝对病例数在两次COVID-19大流行波开始时总是高估了增长率。总的来说,这支持非三角测试机制,可以从数据中推断出来,并应当加以审查。