Abstract
Phylodynamic analyses enable the inference of epidemiological parameters from pathogen genome sequences for enhanced genomic surveillance in public health. Pathogen genome sequences and their associated sampling times are the essential data in every analysis. However, sampling times are usually associated with hospitalisation or testing dates and can sometimes be used to identify individual patients, posing a threat to patient confidentiality. To lower this risk, sampling times are often given with reduced date-resolution to the month or year, which can potentially bias inference of epidemiological parameters. Here, we characterise the extent to which reduced date-resolution biases phylodynamic analyses across a diverse range of empirical and simulated datasets. We develop a practical guideline on when date-rounding biases phylodynamic inference and we show that this bias is both unpredictable in its direction and compounds with decreasing date-resolution, higher substitution rates, and shorter sampling intervals. We conclude by discussing future solutions that prioritise patient confidentiality and propose a method for safer sharing of sampling dates by translating them uniformly by a random number.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
LAF was supported by DE190100805 awarded to SD.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data and code to reproduce the analyses and results are available at: https://github.com/LeoFeatherstone/pdp
Data Availability
All analyses and data used in this work can be accessed and run as a Snakemake pipline at https://github.com/LeoFeatherstone/pdp.
