checklist of questions to understand testing coronavirus

 

Many countries aren't yet providing official figures. Others don't do so on an everyday basis. the primary question to ask, then, is that if there's any testing data for a given country.

Equally important is to create the available data findable. Currently, the available data is usually tough to search out, because some countries are releasing figures at unpredictable intervals in ad-hoc locations (including social media or press conferences).

What testing technologies are being - used?

There are many alternative technologies for COVID-19 testing, a number of which are already implemented, some currently available but not yet extended, and a few still in developmen 

It’s critical that governments provide an in depth and explicit account of the technologies that are being implemented as they get unrolled, disaggregating the test results accordingly. For citizens to trust and understand the published data, and for epidemiologists to include the info into the models that inform public policy, it's crucial that each country provides the info on testing in an exceedingly clearly documented way.

 - Do numbers seek advice from ‘performed tests’ or ‘individuals tested’?

The number of tests performed is different to the amount of people tested. the rationale for this can be that it's common for COVID-19 testing that the identical person is tested over once.

Some countries report tests performed, while others report the amount of people tested. within the latter case, it must be clear if those that undergo multiple rounds of testing (for instance because they suspected they were infected in March, so again in September) are counted per round of testing, or just one occasion.

The data description should state clearly what's counted.

- Are negative results included? Are pending results included?

It must be clear whether or not figures for the full number of tests performed, or the amount of individuals tested, include negative test results, yet because the number of tests that are pending results.

Many sources report the amount of people who are ‘suspected’ or are ‘ruled out’. To be reliably included in test counts, it has to be explicit whether such categories reflect the amount of individuals who are awaiting test results or have tested negatively

 Are all regions and laboratories within a rustic submitting data on the identical basis?

so as to assess the reliability of aggregate testing data, it must be clear if heterogenous data is being summed together.

The US COVID Tracking Project, for example makes it clear that their US totals combine data for tests performed and individuals tested, counting on which is reported by individual states.

 - What time do the announced numbers refer? 

Cumulative counts of the overall number of tests should analyze the originate which the count begins. The key question that has to be answered is whether or not the figures published at some date (attempt to) include all tests conducted up to it date.

It must be made clear by the source if this might be the case. The US CDC, for example, makes this clear.

 - Are there any issues that affect the comparability of the information over time?

If we wish to seem at how testing figures are changing over time, we want to grasp how any of the factors discussed above may have changed too.

 As new labs get included, their past cumulative total gets added to the day they start reporting, creating spikes within the statistic.

What are the standard testing

 practices within the country?

Having a way of how often and when individuals are tested, can help the users of those statistics understand how estimates of tests performed and individuals tested might relate to every other.

For instance, what percentage tests does a case investigation require? What are the eligibility criteria to be tested? Are medical examiners, or other specific groups, being routinely retested?