TY - JOUR T1 - “No test is better than a bad test”: Impact of diagnostic uncertainty in mass testing on the spread of COVID-19 JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.04.16.20067884 SP - 2020.04.16.20067884 AU - Nicholas Gray AU - Dominic Calleja AU - Alexander Wimbush AU - Enrique Miralles-Dolz AU - Ander Gray AU - Marco De-Angelis AU - Elfriede Derrer-Merk AU - Bright Uchenna Oparaji AU - Vladimir Stepanov AU - Louis Clearkin AU - Scott Ferson Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/06/2020.04.16.20067884.abstract N2 - Testing is viewed as a critical aspect of any strategy to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic. Much of the dialogue around testing has concentrated on how countries can scale up capacity, but the uncertainty in testing has not received nearly as much attention beyond asking if a test is accurate enough to be used. Even for highly accurate tests, false positives and false negatives will accumulate as mass testing strategies are employed under pressure, and these misdiagnoses could have major implications on the ability of governments to suppress the virus. The present analysis uses a modified SIR model to understand the implication and magnitude of misdiagnosis in the context of ending lock-down measures. The results indicate that increased testing capacity alone will not provide a solution to lock-down measures in the UK. The progression of the epidemic and peak infections is shown to depend heavily on test characteristics, test targeting, and prevalence of the infection. Antibody based immunity passports are rejected as a solution to ending lockdown, as they can put the population at risk if poorly targeted. Similarly, mass screening for active viral infection may only be beneficial if it can be sufficiently well targeted, otherwise reliance on this approach for protection of the population can again put them at risk. A well targeted active viral test combined with a slow release rate is a viable strategy for continuous suppression of the virus.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work has been partially funded by the EPSRC IAA exploration award with grant number EP/R511729/1, EPSRC programme grant "Digital twins for improved dynamic design", EP/R006768/1, and the EPSRC and ESRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Quantification and Management of Risk and Uncertainty in Complex Systems and Environments, EP/L015927/1.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data can be made available ER -