English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Capture-recapture analysis has been used to evaluate infectious disease surveillance. Violation of the underlying assumptions can jeopardize the validity of the capture-recapture estimates and a tool is needed for cross-validation. We re-examined 19 datasets of log-linear model capture-recapture studies on infectious disease incidence using three truncated models for incomplete count data as alternative population estimators. The truncated models yield comparable estimates to independent log-linear capture-recapture models and to parsimonious log-linear models when the number of patients is limited, or the ratio between patients registered once and twice is between 0.5 and 1.5. Compared to saturated log-linear models the truncated models produce considerably lower and often more plausible estimates. We conclude that for estimating infectious disease incidence independent and parsimonious three-source log-linear capture-recapture models are preferable but truncated models can be used as a heuristic tool to identify possible failure in log-linear models, especially when saturated log-linear models are selected.

Estimating infectious diseases incidence: validity of capture–recapture analysis and truncated models for incomplete count data