This thread from December pointed out that convenience samples are not suitable for any but the coarsest estimates of prevalence, and that the popularity of a prevalence study like this can be driven more by its status as an outlier than by its quality. 1/https://twitter.com/WesPegden/status/1336801382955933697 …
-
-
Inferring causation from correlation or prevalence from nonrandom samples is inherently fraught regardless of whether we can correctly guess at specific possible confounders. This example shows the ways in which our imagination can fail. This piece has another lesson also: 4/
Show this thread -
The popularity of the study (a prevalence study on blood donors published in Science!) certainly seemed tied to its role in debates about HITs and attack rates. It might be easy to see the study as being in service of a noble cause in an important dispute. 5/
Show this thread -
But locally, in Manaus, the study had exactly the opposite effect; local epidemiologists there blame the study for contributing to misplaced optimism about herd immunity from the first wave of the epidemic, and making the case for further pandemic response more difficult. 6/
Show this thread -
So much science in the pandemic has been filtered through the lens of preconceived notions about effects on policy. But scientists have not been good at this. It may be better to stick to just trying to understand the truth as well as possible. 7/7
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"not discussed in the paper" wildhttps://twitter.com/WesPegden/status/1349924706586124294 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks Wes. Important thread. I didn't find this out until recently and I was like WHAT!?! It was obvious there were problems because it was so much higher than the other random sample and just so much higher than anywhere else. Age adjusted IFR estimate didn't match, either.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It doesn't matter a lot because a new strain mutated, so don't dream of herd immunity
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I’m curious how this is different than other randomized seroprevalence studies that basically offer free antibody tests (or in some cases, gift cards upon completion).
-
I don't know if you're referring to something specific, but in a well-designed random study you would know the response rate, and thus could bound the the effects, e.g., of any incentives on the choice to participate.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.