  We propose a partial identification method for estimating disease prevalence
from serology studies. Our data are results from antibody tests in some
population sample, where the test parameters, such as the true/false positive
rates, are unknown. Our method scans the entire parameter space, and rejects
parameter values using the joint data density as the test statistic. The
proposed method is conservative for marginal inference, in general, but its key
advantage over more standard approaches is that it is valid in finite samples
even when the underlying model is not point identified. Moreover, our method
requires only independence of serology test results, and does not rely on
asymptotic arguments, normality assumptions, or other approximations. We use
recent Covid-19 serology studies in the US, and show that the parameter
confidence set is generally wide, and cannot support definite conclusions.
Specifically, recent serology studies from California suggest a prevalence
anywhere in the range 0%-2% (at the time of study), and are therefore
inconclusive. However, this range could be narrowed down to 0.7%-1.5% if the
actual false positive rate of the antibody test was indeed near its empirical
estimate (~0.5%). In another study from New York state, Covid-19 prevalence is
confidently estimated in the range 13%-17% in mid-April of 2020, which also
suggests significant geographic variation in Covid-19 exposure across the US.
Combining all datasets yields a 5%-8% prevalence range. Our results overall
suggest that serology testing on a massive scale can give crucial information
for future policy design, even when such tests are imperfect and their
parameters unknown.
