1989
DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780080610
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Regression models for time to seroconversion following experimental bovine leukaemia virus infection

Abstract: This paper develops a parametric model for time to seroconversion after experimental bovine leukaemia virus (BLV) infection, and examines the effects of inoculation route, volume of inoculum, type of inoculation material, and antigen status of donor on seroconversion time. We used parametric and nonparametric statistical methodology to analyse interval data on 150 animals from 13 published reports. The log-logistic model fitted the observed times to seroconversion better than the log-normal or Weibull models, … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Time of sero-conversion depends on several factors such as transmission route (natural versus experimental infection), the effective infective dose administered, the sampling period and the sensitivity of the method used for detection of specific antibodies (Evermann et al, 1986;Monti and Frankena, 2005). The sero-conversion time observed (about 30 DPI, except for animal F086) for both groups is similar to previous observations for experimentally infected animals (Klintevall et al, 1997;Lassauzet et al, 1989;Nagy et al, 2007), but is shorter than the median seroconversion time estimated by Monti et al (48 DPI) (Monti and Frankena, 2005). This discrepancy is probably due to the characteristics of their analysis that involved a greater number of animals, several experimental designs and the use of different serological tests.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Time of sero-conversion depends on several factors such as transmission route (natural versus experimental infection), the effective infective dose administered, the sampling period and the sensitivity of the method used for detection of specific antibodies (Evermann et al, 1986;Monti and Frankena, 2005). The sero-conversion time observed (about 30 DPI, except for animal F086) for both groups is similar to previous observations for experimentally infected animals (Klintevall et al, 1997;Lassauzet et al, 1989;Nagy et al, 2007), but is shorter than the median seroconversion time estimated by Monti et al (48 DPI) (Monti and Frankena, 2005). This discrepancy is probably due to the characteristics of their analysis that involved a greater number of animals, several experimental designs and the use of different serological tests.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…This scenario is ideally suited to the technique of probabilistic modeling, in which probability distributions are fitted to observed data. 5,9,28 The desired probability estimates can then be calculated using these distributions. The objective of this study was to predict the duration of detectable viremia in BTV-infected cattle using a statistical analysis of existing data.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The hazard function h(t) is given by If the distribution f (t) is a mixed distribution of fi(t) and f2(t) with weight w and 1-w, i.e., f (t) = wf1(t)+ (1-w)f2 (t), then where which leads to Equation (4) . then which leads to Equation (5) .…”
Section: Appendixmentioning
confidence: 96%