These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27853708)

  • 1. FLOQSwab™: Optimisation of Procedures for the Recovery of Microbiological Samples from Surfaces.
    Finazzi G; Losio MN; Varisco G
    Ital J Food Saf; 2016 Jun; 5(3):5756. PubMed ID: 27853708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Qualification of high-recovery, flocked swabs as compared to traditional rayon swabs for microbiological environmental monitoring of surfaces.
    Dalmaso G; Bini M; Paroni R; Ferrari M
    PDA J Pharm Sci Technol; 2008; 62(3):191-9. PubMed ID: 18661868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of the Recovery Rate of Different Swabs for Microbial Environmental Monitoring.
    Goverde M; Willrodt J; Staerk A
    PDA J Pharm Sci Technol; 2017 1/2; 71(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 27516491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of rayon swab surface sample collection method for Bacillus spores from nonporous surfaces.
    Brown GS; Betty RG; Brockmann JE; Lucero DA; Souza CA; Walsh KS; Boucher RM; Tezak MS; Wilson MC; Rudolph T; Lindquist HD; Martinez KF
    J Appl Microbiol; 2007 Oct; 103(4):1074-80. PubMed ID: 17897212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of the efficiency of Isohelix™ and Rayon swabs for recovery of DNA from metal surfaces.
    Bonsu DOM; Higgins D; Henry J; Austin JJ
    Forensic Sci Med Pathol; 2021 Jun; 17(2):199-207. PubMed ID: 33180274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of Isohelix™ and Rayon swabbing systems for touch DNA recovery from metal surfaces.
    Bonsu DOM; Rodie M; Higgins D; Henry J; Austin JJ
    Forensic Sci Med Pathol; 2021 Dec; 17(4):577-584. PubMed ID: 34674113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. New technique to take samples from environmental surfaces using flocked nylon swabs.
    Hedin G; Rynbäck J; Loré B
    J Hosp Infect; 2010 Aug; 75(4):314-7. PubMed ID: 20451296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of performance of genetics 4N6 FLOQSwabs™ with or without surfactant to rayon swabs.
    Frippiat C; Noel F
    J Forensic Leg Med; 2016 Aug; 42():96-9. PubMed ID: 27314974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Problems associated with traditional hygiene swabbing: the need for in-house standardization.
    Moore G; Griffith C
    J Appl Microbiol; 2007 Oct; 103(4):1090-103. PubMed ID: 17897214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of the MicroWorks, Inc. Swab Sampling System (MSSSTM) for Use in Performing Quantitative Swab Sampling.
    Rubio S; McIver D; Behm N; Fisher M; Fleming W
    PDA J Pharm Sci Technol; 2010; 64(2):167-81. PubMed ID: 21502016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Touch DNA recovery from vehicle surfaces using different swabs.
    Giovanelli A; Grazinoli Garrido R; Rocha A; Hessab T
    J Forensic Sci; 2022 Mar; 67(2):707-711. PubMed ID: 34725823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of a New Environmental Sampling Protocol for Detection of Human Norovirus on Inanimate Surfaces.
    Park GW; Lee D; Treffiletti A; Hrsak M; Shugart J; Vinjé J
    Appl Environ Microbiol; 2015 Sep; 81(17):5987-92. PubMed ID: 26116675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Swab sample transfer for point-of-care diagnostics: characterization of swab types and manual agitation methods.
    Panpradist N; Toley BJ; Zhang X; Byrnes S; Buser JR; Englund JA; Lutz BR
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(9):e105786. PubMed ID: 25181250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of a novel material, Diomics X-Swab™, for collection of DNA.
    Marshall PL; Stoljarova M; Larue BL; King JL; Budowle B
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2014 Sep; 12():192-8. PubMed ID: 25016249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of flocked nylon swabs and non-flocked rayon swabs for detection of respiratory bacteria in nasopharyngeal carriage in Australian Indigenous children.
    Wigger C; Morris PS; Stevens M; Smith-Vaughan H; Hare K; Beissbarth J; Leach AJ
    J Microbiol Methods; 2019 Feb; 157():47-49. PubMed ID: 30578888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Touch DNA collection - Performance of four different swabs.
    Comte J; Baechler S; Gervaix J; Lock E; Milon MP; Delémont O; Castella V
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2019 Nov; 43():102113. PubMed ID: 31525724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The Extraction and Recovery Efficiency of Pure DNA for Different Types of Swabs.
    Bruijns BB; Tiggelaar RM; Gardeniers H
    J Forensic Sci; 2018 Sep; 63(5):1492-1499. PubMed ID: 29890011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of calcium alginate-tipped aluminum swabs transported in Culturettes containing ampules of 2-sucrose phosphate medium for recovery of Chlamydia trachomatis.
    Smith TF; Weed LA
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1983 Aug; 80(2):213-5. PubMed ID: 6349325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparative evaluation of MicroDTTect device and flocked swabs in the diagnosis of prosthetic and orthopaedic infections.
    Calori GM; Colombo M; Navone P; Nobile M; Auxilia F; Toscano M; Drago L
    Injury; 2016 Oct; 47 Suppl 4():S17-S21. PubMed ID: 27492065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of Swab Sampling Methods for Norovirus Recovery on Surfaces.
    Lee C; Park S; Cho K; Yoo JE; Lee S; Ko G
    Food Environ Virol; 2018 Dec; 10(4):378-385. PubMed ID: 30094754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.