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 *

119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37169459)

  • 21. An in vitro system for the comparison of excision and wet-dry swabbing for microbiological sampling of beef carcasses.
    Cenci-Goga BT; Miraglia D; Ranucci D; Branciari R; Budelli L; McCrindle CM; Cioffi A; Mammoli R
    J Food Prot; 2007 Apr; 70(4):930-6. PubMed ID: 17477263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Collaborative swab performance comparison and the impact of sampling solution volumes on DNA recovery.
    Seiberle I; Währer J; Kron S; Flury K; Girardin M; Schocker A; Schulz I
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2022 Jul; 59():102716. PubMed ID: 35512614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Development of an ELISA for evaluation of swab recovery efficiencies of bovine serum albumin.
    Sparding N; Slotved HC; Nicolaisen GM; Giese SB; Elmlund J; Steenhard NR
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(11):e112876. PubMed ID: 25402464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Comparison of two non-invasive methods of microbial analysis in surgery practice: incision swabbing and the indirect imprint technique.
    Chovanec Z; Veverkova L; Votava M; Svoboda J; Jedlicka V; Capov I
    Surg Infect (Larchmt); 2014 Dec; 15(6):786-93. PubMed ID: 25478933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Systematic study for DNA recovery and profiling from common IED substrates: From laboratory to casework.
    Phetpeng S; Kitpipit T; Thanakiatkrai P
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 Jul; 17():53-60. PubMed ID: 25828367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Influence of swabbing solution and swab type on DNA recovery from rigid environmental surfaces.
    You HS; Lee SH; Ok YJ; Kang HG; Sung HJ; Lee JY; Kang SS; Hyun SH
    J Microbiol Methods; 2019 Jun; 161():12-17. PubMed ID: 31004622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Cell counting to monitor swab efficiency.
    Nolan M; Linacre A
    J Forensic Sci; 2024 May; 69(3):1002-1010. PubMed ID: 38380584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Electrostatic sampling of trace DNA from clothing.
    Zieger M; Defaux PM; Utz S
    Int J Legal Med; 2016 May; 130(3):661-7. PubMed ID: 26753871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The influence of swabbing solutions on DNA recovery from touch samples.
    Thomasma SM; Foran DR
    J Forensic Sci; 2013 Mar; 58(2):465-9. PubMed ID: 23278347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Laboratory diagnosis of congenital CMV infection in newborns: Impact of pre-analytic factors.
    Kohmer N; Nagel A; Berger A; Enders M; Hamprecht K; Korn K; Kortenbusch M; Überla K; Rabenau HF
    J Clin Virol; 2019 Jun; 115():32-36. PubMed ID: 30959324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparison of DRY and WET vaginal swabs with cervical specimens in Roche Cobas 4800 HPV and Abbott RealTime High Risk HPV tests.
    Jun JK; Lim MC; Hwang SH; Shin HY; Hwang NR; Kim YJ; Yoo CW; Lee DO; Joo J; Park SY; Lee DH
    J Clin Virol; 2016 Jun; 79():80-84. PubMed ID: 27111579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Concordance in diabetic foot ulceration: a cross-sectional study of agreement between wound swabbing and tissue sampling in infected ulcers.
    Nelson EA; Wright-Hughes A; Brown S; Lipsky BA; Backhouse M; Bhogal M; Ndosi M; Reynolds C; Sykes G; Dowson C; Edmonds M; Vowden P; Jude EB; Dickie T; Nixon J
    Health Technol Assess; 2016 Nov; 20(82):1-176. PubMed ID: 27827300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Experimental comparison of excision and swabbing microbiological sampling methods for carcasses.
    Pepperell R; Reid CA; Solano SN; Hutchison ML; Walters LD; Johnston AM; Buncic S
    J Food Prot; 2005 Oct; 68(10):2163-8. PubMed ID: 16245724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The effect of DNA recovery on the subsequent quality of latent fingermarks.
    Fieldhouse S; Oravcova E; Walton-Williams L
    Forensic Sci Int; 2016 Oct; 267():78-88. PubMed ID: 27572637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Chemical enhancement techniques of bloodstain patterns and DNA recovery after fire exposure.
    Tontarski KL; Hoskins KA; Watkins TG; Brun-Conti L; Michaud AL
    J Forensic Sci; 2009 Jan; 54(1):37-48. PubMed ID: 19018938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Evaluation of methods to improve the extraction and recovery of DNA from cotton swabs for forensic analysis.
    Adamowicz MS; Stasulli DM; Sobestanovich EM; Bille TW
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(12):e116351. PubMed ID: 25549111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The novel use of a spray-on rubber coating to recover cellular material from the surface of bricks.
    Cahill MJ; Chapman B
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2020 Nov; 49():102404. PubMed ID: 33038617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. New oral cut-off time limits in NSW.
    Nittis M; Franco M; Cochrane C
    J Forensic Leg Med; 2016 Nov; 44():92-97. PubMed ID: 27697690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. ESDA®-Lite collection of DNA from latent fingerprints on documents.
    Plaza DT; Mealy JL; Lane JN; Parsons MN; Bathrick AS; Slack DP
    Forensic Sci Int Genet; 2015 May; 16():8-12. PubMed ID: 25479402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.