137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32721418)
1. Impact of swab material on microbial surface sampling.
Jansson L; Akel Y; Eriksson R; Lavander M; Hedman J
J Microbiol Methods; 2020 Sep; 176():106006. PubMed ID: 32721418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Enhanced forensic DNA recovery with appropriate swabs and optimized swabbing technique.
Hedman J; Akel Y; Jansson L; Hedell R; Wallmark N; Forsberg C; Ansell R
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2021 Jul; 53():102491. PubMed ID: 33774569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Efficacy of a Sonicating Swab for Removal and Capture of Microorganisms from Experimental and Natural Contaminated Surfaces.
Ahnrud GP; Mendoza AJ; Hurley MJ; Marek PJ
Appl Environ Microbiol; 2018 May; 84(9):. PubMed ID: 29500264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The double-swab technique versus single swabs for human DNA recovery from various surfaces.
Hedman J; Jansson L; Akel Y; Wallmark N; Gutierrez Liljestrand R; Forsberg C; Ansell R
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 May; 46():102253. PubMed ID: 32007674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparison of DNA collection and retrieval from two swab types (cotton and nylon flocked swab) when processed using three QIAGEN extraction methods.
Brownlow RJ; Dagnall KE; Ames CE
J Forensic Sci; 2012 May; 57(3):713-7. PubMed ID: 22211626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Feasibility of using alternative swabs and storage solutions for paired SARS-CoV-2 detection and microbiome analysis in the hospital environment.
Minich JJ; Ali F; Marotz C; Belda-Ferre P; Chiang L; Shaffer JP; Carpenter CS; McDonald D; Gilbert J; Allard SM; Allen EE; Knight R; Sweeney DA; Swafford AD
Microbiome; 2021 Jan; 9(1):25. PubMed ID: 33482920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of swab types for collection and analysis of microorganisms.
Wise NM; Wagner SJ; Worst TJ; Sprague JE; Oechsle CM
Microbiologyopen; 2021 Nov; 10(6):e1244. PubMed ID: 34964289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of polyurethane foam to nylon flocked swabs for collection of secretions from the anterior nares in performance of a rapid influenza virus antigen test in a pediatric emergency department.
Scansen KA; Bonsu BK; Stoner E; Mack K; Salamon D; Leber A; Marcon MJ
J Clin Microbiol; 2010 Mar; 48(3):852-6. PubMed ID: 20053857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Evaluation of swabs and transport media for the recovery of Yersinia pestis.
Gilbert SE; Rose LJ; Howard M; Bradley MD; Shah S; Silvestri E; Schaefer FW; Noble-Wang J
J Microbiol Methods; 2014 Jan; 96():35-41. PubMed ID: 24184311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A comparison of cotton-tipped and nylon flocked swabs for culture of Neisseria gonorrhoeae from oropharyngeal samples.
Phillips TR; Tabesh M; Fairley CK; Maddaford K; Pasricha S; Wigan R; De Petra V; Williamson DA; Chow EPF
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis; 2021 Nov; 101(3):115455. PubMed ID: 34256252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Post-coital vaginal sampling with nylon flocked swabs improves DNA typing.
Benschop CC; Wiebosch DC; Kloosterman AD; Sijen T
Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2010 Feb; 4(2):115-21. PubMed ID: 20129470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Test and validation of methods to sample and detect human virus from environmental surfaces using norovirus as a model virus.
Ibfelt T; Frandsen T; Permin A; Andersen LP; Schultz AC
J Hosp Infect; 2016 Apr; 92(4):378-84. PubMed ID: 26905662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Nondestructive Biological Evidence Collection with Alternative Swabs and Adhesive Lifters.
Plaza DT; Mealy JL; Lane JN; Parsons MN; Bathrick AS; Slack DP
J Forensic Sci; 2016 Mar; 61(2):485-488. PubMed ID: 27404622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Screening for cytomegalovirus shedding in vagina and saliva: Significant differences between biological fluids, swab types and storage durations in DNA recovery.
Tan NK; Pope CF; Carrington D
J Clin Virol; 2022 Jan; 146():105055. PubMed ID: 34953320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of sampling methods for the detection of human rhinovirus RNA.
Waris M; Österback R; Lahti E; Vuorinen T; Ruuskanen O; Peltola V
J Clin Virol; 2013 Sep; 58(1):200-4. PubMed ID: 23810645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Swab materials and Bacillus anthracis spore recovery from nonporous surfaces.
Rose L; Jensen B; Peterson A; Banerjee SN; Srduino MJ
Emerg Infect Dis; 2004 Jun; 10(6):1023-9. PubMed ID: 15207053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Swabs as DNA collection devices for sampling different biological materials from different substrates.
Verdon TJ; Mitchell RJ; van Oorschot RA
J Forensic Sci; 2014 Jul; 59(4):1080-9. PubMed ID: 24502761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
