ライフサイエンスコーパス: swab

1 rom clinical specimens (e.g., nasopharyngeal swabs).

2 to detect viral RNA from a throat+nose self-swab.

3 irus 2 on RT-PCR assay from a nose or throat swab.

4 tive swab >=45 days after the first-positive swab.

5 ene by polymerase chain reaction on a rectal swab.

6 geal (3DP) swab as a replacement of the FLNP swab.

7 n, were associated with detection via buccal swab.

8 n they test positive for COVID-19 on a nasal swab.

9 itative viral output concordant with flocked swabs.

10 ing, including flocked nasopharyngeal (FLNP) swabs.

11 g of sputum, nasopharyngeal swabs, or throat swabs.

12 eutralizing antibodies in her nasopharyngeal swabs.

13 correctly or less efficiently sampled buccal swabs.

14 urrent standard of nasopharyngeal and throat swabs.

15 oche Cobas) on a total of 169 nasopharyngeal swabs.

16 pplied 16S rRNA gene sequencing to all nasal swabs.

17 viruses were identified from nasopharyngeal swabs.

18 rvix) every four months using self-collected swabs.

19 transport media and 45% when using dry nasal swabs.

20 dial organisms were detected in mouse rectal swabs.

21 d 12, participants provided rectal and groin swabs.

22 ction (RT-PCR) assay of nasal and pharyngeal swabs.

23 on in urine samples, oro-pharyngeal and anal swabs.

24 method to detect colonization than pernasal swabs.

25 meat microbiota, and with real environmental swabs.

26 delayed live organism shedding in the rectal swabs.

27 g, their costs would be lower than clinician swabs.

28 was performed on DNA extracted from vaginal swabs.

29 in the lungs but not viral shedding in nasal swabs.

30 behaviour and welfare after fin clipping and swabbing.

31 Of 1,480 prospectively collected saliva swabs, 1,472 (99.5%) were negative by both the Alethia a

32 Trained parents collected nasal swabs 3 weeks after hospitalization and, when healthy, d

33 Half of 922 environmental swabs (447, 48%) were positive for VREfm.

34 rongly influenced by the taking of five boot swabs (95% CI 70-100) instead of two (95% CI 40-100) or

35 m tuberculosis DNA can be detected from oral swabs, a noninvasive, safe alternative sample type; howe

36 otection in bronchoalveolar lavage and nasal swabs after SARS-CoV-2 challenge.

37 y syndrome coronavirus 2 from nasopharyngeal swab and cerebral spinal fluid.

38 Self-collected anal swab and oral rinse specimens were assessed for 37 types

39 routinely tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by nasal swab and real-time polymerase chain reaction between Mar

40 tinely collected by combined nose and throat swabbing and establish a statistically significant corre

41 non-qualified clinicians would oversee self-swabbing and these costs would be lower than clinician's

42 s 10.5% [6.3% in urine samples, 4.3% in anal swabs and 0.5% in throat swabs] and remained unchanged a

43 Mixed anogenital swabs and cervical secretions were self-collected by nin

44 s evaluated in residual combined throat/nose swabs and compared to that of the Public Health England

45 Weekly stool and nasal swabs and daily symptom diaries were collected.

46 al RNA extracted directly from oropharyngeal swabs and evaluated by quantitative reverse transcriptio

47 in cobas PCR medium tubes and from urethral swabs and in the presence of simulated Chlamydia coinfec

48 s IAVs circulating in Brazil and detected in swabs and nasal washes.

49 oss and viral RNA and/or infectious virus in swabs and organs (e.g., lungs).

50 rapidly inactivate viruses in nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva in 10 min.

51 6s rRNA-based analysis was performed on oral swabs and stool samples obtained biweekly from baseline

52 The sensitivities in female vaginal swabs and urine samples were 96.6% (95% confidence inter

53 Patient-collected pharyngeal and rectal swabs and urine were 92%, 96%, 96% sensitive, while clin

54 We analyzed nasopharyngeal swabs and vaccination histories from 5928 children aged

55 R cycle threshold values from nasopharyngeal swabs and viral shedding in blood, urine, and stool.

56 swabs) and eDNA samples collected from finite population

57 Amniotic fluid, cord blood, neonatal throat swab, and breastmilk samples from six patients were test

58 le-end total RNA samples from nasopharyngeal swabs, and establish the applicability of arcasHLA in me

59 C. difficile isolates from VRE swabs, and from C. difficile-positive stool samples, wer

60 spinal fluid, lung tissue, respiratory tract swabs, and rectal swabs) for >100 real-time polymerase c

61 antitative real-time PCR from nasopharyngeal swabs, and SARS-CoV-2 antibody status were available.RES

62 mples, 4.3% in anal swabs and 0.5% in throat swabs] and remained unchanged at 6 months whether or not

63 swabs (NPS) to self-collected anterior nasal swabs (ANS) and straight saliva for the diagnosis of cor

64 Although swabbing appears to be less invasive than fin clipping,

65 Traditionally, throat swabs are inoculated onto agar plates for isolation of t

66 Overall, conjunctival swabs are positive in 2.5%.

67 developed a 3D-printed nasopharyngeal (3DP) swab as a replacement of the FLNP swab.

68 etected in mucosal samples, including rectal swabs, as late as 15 days after exposure.

69 polymerase chain reaction in nasopharyngeal swab at day 3.

70 We collected impetigo lesions swabs at baseline, 3 and 12 months to detect antimicrobi

71 We collected nasopharyngeal or nasal swabs at enrollment and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using a re

72 ace detection are shown to be much less than swab based methods.

73 iral shedding measured from nasal and throat swabs, bronchoalveolar lavages, and tissues was not redu

74 D-19 testing utilizing easy-to-collect nasal swabs but demonstrated <100% PPA compared to PCR.

75 Clinician swabs cost less than self-swabs but in asymptomatic people, or doing home testing,

76 40-100) or the supplementing of the two boot swabs by a dust sample (95% CI 43-100).

77 of bacteria (TVC) in food and environmental swabs by oxygen respirometry.

78 Buccal genetic cheek swab, circulating serum dietary carotenoids and long-ter

79 Of the 678 swabs collected during the surveillance period, 237 (35%

80 on the skin, bacterial DNA was analyzed from swabs collected from lesional and nonlesional skin in a

81 We re-analysed 640 throat swabs collected from patients in Wuhan with influenza-li

82 high-resolution anoscopy (HRA) for anorectal swabs collection to investigate STIs and for anal biopsy

83 Swabs containing the samples were collected both at base

84 Clinician swabs cost less than self-swabs but in asymptomatic peop

85 Microbial swab cultures of the conjunctiva both before instillatio

86 Participants self-collected mid-turbinate swabs daily (days 1 to 14) for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase cha

87 that were linked with virological (n = 5910 swabs) data.

88 Transcriptional profiling of nasopharyngeal swabs demonstrated that in addition to type-I interferon

89 e performance of a novel pathogen aptasensor swab designed to qualitatively and quantitatively detect

90 A total of 600 chicken meat swabs (divided equally between broiler and layer farms,

91 Skin swabbing does not require the use of anaesthetics and tr

92 ldren persistently tested positive on rectal swabs even after nasopharyngeal testing was negative, ra

93 of the AMG assay by testing residual vaginal swab, female urine, and male urine specimens obtained fr

94 lus first catch urine (MSM) and vulvovaginal swabs (females), for NG/CT detection.

95 A extraction step from a nasopharyngeal (NP) swab followed by reverse transcription-quantitative poly

96 ection of the virus antigen was achieved via swabbing followed by competitive assay using a fixed amo

97 Collection of nasopharyngeal samples using swabs followed by the transfer of the virus into a solut

98 live pGP3-deficient Chlamydia sp. in rectal swabs following an oral inoculation.

99 Frogs were swabbed for pathogen load and skin bacterial diversity a

100 ce of SARS-CoV-2 infection in nasopharyngeal swabs for 85.9% and 71.5% of the population of Vo' at tw

101 al transport media for Cepheid and dry nasal swabs for Abbott ID Now.

102 ay showed no significant differences between swabs for both gene targets (p=0.152 and p=0.092), with

103 es showed no significant differences between swabs for both viral gene targets in the Roche cobas ass

104 Annually, providers collected separate anal swabs for HPV detection and cytopathologic examination.

105 ergently develop and clinically validate new swabs for immediate mass production by 3D printing.

106 d collected data on other symptoms and nasal swabs for influenza rRT-PCR testing.

107 Weekly, skin swabs for microbiome analysis (deep sequencing) were tak

108 The children were examined and nasal swabs for the detection of RSV were obtained during each

109 tissue, respiratory tract swabs, and rectal swabs) for >100 real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR

110 he detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swabs from 108 symptomatic patients.

111 cterial load) abundance data from 833 rectal swabs from 133 ESBL-positive patients followed up in a p

112 Lung aspirates and nasopharyngeal swabs from 31 patients were examined by culture, qPCR, w

113 A sequencing profiles of nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs from 430 individuals with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2

114 rriage among 1897 ICU patients, using rectal swabs from an existing ICU vancomycin-resistant Enteroco

115 Skin swabs from atopic and healthy adult subjects were analyz

116 esistance of E. faecium isolated from rectal swabs from daptomycin-exposed patients was compared to a

117 from 164 flocks submitted eight interdigital swabs from eight, preferably diseased, sheep.

118 esearchers collected clinical data and nasal swabs from infants hospitalized for bronchiolitis.

119 Archived saliva swabs from newborns with cCMV infection were also tested

120 All 34 (100%) archived swabs from newborns with cCMV infection were positive by

121 We collected pharyngeal and rectal swabs from participants.

122 newly symptomatic, we collected respiratory swabs from patients and household contacts for testing b

123 Shotgun sequencing of vaginal swabs from postmenopausal women self-identified as Black

124 uthorization by the FDA using nasopharyngeal swabs from symptomatic patients: the New York SARS-CoV-2

125 We detected high viral loads in swabs from the nose and throat of all of the macaques, a

126 Incisional skin swabs from this patient demonstrated a sharp postoperati

127 C19 major alleles (*2, *3, *17) via salivary swab (genotyped group) or no genotyping (usual care) to

128 hirmer's test strips (group 1), conjunctival swab (group 2), and Schirmer's test strips (group 3).

129 (0.18%) had at least one subsequent positive swab >=45 days after the first-positive swab.

130 Consequently, VOC analysis of vaginal swabs has potential to be used as a predictive tool.

131 tested included nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs in the above-named transport media, bronchoalveola

132 pheid Xpert Xpress when using nasopharyngeal swabs in viral transport media and 45% when using dry na

133 the wood shavings compared to the microbial swabs, indicating a complex and heterogeneous chemical c

134 We characterized the assay by dipping swabs into synthetic nasal fluid spiked with the virus,

135 We demonstrated that self-sampling with foam swabs is well-tolerated and provides quantitative viral

136 Surface samples were collected by swabbing items in the immediate vicinity of each air sam

137 Swabbing led to a smaller change in cortisol release and

138 h a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine.

139 Patient stools (n = 376) and environmental swabs (n = 922) were taken at intervals and cultured for

140 SARS-CoV-2 RNA was only detected in nasal swab, nasal turbinates, and mesenteric lymph node, but n

141 y syndrome coronavirus 2 at nasal-pharyngeal swabbing, negative chest CT findings, and incomplete cli

142 rototype and the control, supporting the new swabs' noninferiority (Mann-Whitney U [MWU] test, P > 0.

143 Nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs (NOPS) from 7663 patients were prospectively teste

144 of 20 pathogens directly from nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) specimens.

145 has resulted in shortages of nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) and viral transport media, necessitating the

146 health care worker-collected nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) to self-collected anterior nasal swabs (ANS)

147 viral samples retrieved with nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs).

148 t enrollment and daily nasopharyngeal/throat swabs (NTSs) for RT-PCR testing.

149 e sequencing was performed on nasopharyngeal swabs of all individuals including the reinfection case'

150 and viral infectiousness was measured in the swabs of the reinfection case.

151 om stool of 17/149 (11%) patients and 18/922 swabs of their environment, together with 1 bloodstream

152 a peak at 7.11 x 10(8) RNA copies per throat swab on day 4.

153 polymerase chain reaction of nasopharyngeal swab or serology.

154 Live C. trachomatis recovered from vaginal swabs or endometrial tissues peaked on day 3 and then de

155 OXA-48), and bla (IMP)) directly from rectal swabs or purified colonies within approximately 1 h.

156 s), is a higher-yield specimen compared with swabs or tissues for culture-based detection of microorg

157 ample, urine sample or urethral swab, rectal swab, or pharyngeal swab, respectively, during PrEP care

158 l DNA isolated from peripheral blood, buccal swab, or uninvolved optic nerve.

159 med by PCR testing of sputum, nasopharyngeal swabs, or throat swabs.

160 es over the others and preferred the control swab overall.

161 t performing significantly better in the 3DP swabs (p & 0.001).

162 , with a prevalence of 2.6-69.3% of positive swabs per serogroup.

163 y confirmation using 3 methods: conjunctival swab plus Schirmer's test strips (group 1), conjunctival

164 Given the need for widespread testing, 3DP swabs printed on-site are an alternate to FLNP that can

165 aluated in 172 residual combined nose/throat swabs provided by the Clinical Microbiology and Public H

166 and self-taken samples.Clinicians performed swabs quicker than participants so costs were lower.

167 e chlamydial organisms recovered from rectal swabs reached similar levels between mice with or withou

168 Is by blood sample, urine sample or urethral swab, rectal swab, or pharyngeal swab, respectively, dur

169 Conjunctival swab remains the gold standard of tear collection for RT

170 or urethral swab, rectal swab, or pharyngeal swab, respectively, during PrEP care.

171 12.8%) and 17 of 8100 (0.2%) stool and nasal swabs, respectively.

172 ate counting (HPC) were used to evaluate the swab/rinse recovery efficiency of endospores from stainl

173 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 from respiratory swab RNA extracts.

174 or direct detection of SARS-CoV-2 from nasal swab RNA that can be read with a mobile phone microscope

175 9 was diagnosed by a positive nasopharyngeal swab RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

176 Thirty-three (70%) patients had >=1 HCV+ swab sample (HCV+SS; 48%, 22/46 rectal; 62%, 29/47 nasal

177 isitors 16-24 years old who provided an anal swab sample as part of a repeated cross-sectional survey

178 girls (1993-1994) who provide a vaginal self-swab sample, serum sample, and questionnaire yearly, we

179 alidate the assay by using COVID-19 clinical swab samples and obtain consistent results with RT-PCR a

180 (COVID-19)-in 154 nasopharyngeal and throat swab samples collected at Siriraj Hospital, Thailand.

181 y, we performed 16S rRNA sequencing on stool swab samples collected from neonatal intensive care unit

182 Compositional analyses of 67 stool swab samples demonstrated low diversity and dominance by

183 ers the CMV IgG serostatus from dried buccal swab samples for >80% of the participants.

184 Analysis of 100 human respiratory swab samples for the N and/or E gene of SARS-CoV-2 produ

185 We analyzed three buccal swab samples from 123 adults with culture-confirmed TB i

186 The test was validated with swab samples from surfaces contaminated with E. coli, wi

187 Patient- and clinician-collected vaginal-swab samples obtained from women with symptoms of vagini

188 ISPR assay diagnostic results obtained nasal swab samples of individuals with suspected COVID-19 case

189 d by comparing results of 100 nasopharyngeal swab samples previously characterized by the Stanford He

190 COVID-19 pneumonia (ie, with maternal throat swab samples that were positive for severe acute respira

191 The sensitivities in male urine and meatal swab samples were 100% (95% CI, 94.0 to 100%) and 85.0%

192 Unwetted material powders and microbial swab samples were analyzed using reverse phase liquid ch

193 Nasal swab samples were collected at age 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and

194 plex detection of HPV16/18 in clinical human swab samples were successfully achieved in the DAMR syst

195 t: i) HPV DNA in saliva and clinical vaginal swab samples, and ii) HIV RNA in plasma samples with com

196 rowells, both from buffer and nasopharyngeal swab samples, and presented superior single base-pair re

197 lity of MNAzymes and direct demonstration in swab samples, this system holds great promise for multip

198 cation of target RNA from raw nasopharyngeal swab samples.

199 ine the CMV IgG serostatus from dried buccal swab samples.

200 iotic fluid, cord blood, and neonatal throat swab samples.

201 r both contrived and clinical nasopharyngeal swab samples.

202 ain reaction assay applied to nasopharyngeal swab samples.

203 sequencing of longitudinal stool and tongue swab samples.

204 In the testing, groups of 1-20 swabs samples were prepared using the standard method (I

205 Buccal swab sampling constitutes an attractive non-invasive alt

206 Nasal foam swab self-sampling at home provides a precise, mechanist

207 results by IDNOW had a paired nasopharyngeal swab specimen collected in VTM and tested by the ACOV as

208 Clinical nasopharyngeal swab specimen testing (n = 140) showed 100%, 98.7%, and

209 evaluation, 97 patients for whom a dry nasal swab specimen yielded negative results by IDNOW had a pa

210 ained from amplicon sequencing of human skin swab specimens and oral rinses from healthy individuals.

211 The LFIA reacted with patient nasopharyngeal swab specimens containing as few as 1.8 x 10(6) B. pertu

212 mens, and clinician-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2.

213 ns from live patients and 21 (20%) from oral swab specimens from deceased patients.

214 in reaction assays applied to nasopharyngeal swab specimens in 100 patients with cancer and 2,914 wit

215 Dual throat swab specimens in either liquid Amies or Stuart medium w

216 y to April 2018 and collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens in viral medium.

217 A total of 200 nasopharyngeal swab specimens in viral transport medium (VTM) were coll

218 ymerase-chain-reaction (qPCR) assay of nares swab specimens obtained between the time of arrival and

219 Supervised oral fluid and nasal swab specimens performed similarly to clinician-collecte

220 s, including SARS-CoV; and 85 nasopharyngeal swab specimens positive for other respiratory viruses, i

221 comparing the data using the nasopharyngeal swab specimens tested with Real-Time PCR.

222 The median Ct values for blood and swab specimens were 21.0 and 24.0, respectively (P = .00

223 bronchoalveolar-lavage (BAL) fluid and nasal swab specimens were assessed by polymerase chain reactio

224 We compared self-collected oral fluid swab specimens with and without clinician supervision, c

225 time PCR assay for GAS detection from throat swab specimens within approximately 70 min.

226 ervised self-collected mid-turbinate (nasal) swab specimens, and clinician-collected nasopharyngeal s

227 ussis and B. parapertussis in nasopharyngeal swab specimens.

228 ilarly to clinician-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens.

229 er viral isolates from human and swine nasal swabs, supported the replication of isolates that failed

230 Viruses from nasal swabs taken 1, 3, and 6 days postvaccination were quanti

231 Using vaginal swabs taken closest to delivery, VOC analysis is a good

232 We evaluated rectal swabs taken on Day 7 or later for the presence of new co

233 Proteins isolated from vaginal swabs taken on PND 2 and 16 from six gilts across three

234 dy demonstrates that VOC analysis of vaginal swabs, taken in the midtrimester, is a fair test (AUC 0.

235 imed to ascertain if VOC analysis of vaginal swabs, taken throughout pregnancy, could predict which w

236 deaths per 100 000 population and with nasal swab test positivity rates.

237 Results: The oropharyngeal swab test was positive for SARS-CoV-2.

238 and pelvic examination, including the cotton-swab test.

239 hat is, did not have symptoms at the time of swab testing and did not develop symptoms afterwards).

240 nzalike illness who underwent nasopharyngeal swab testing for influenza and respiratory syncytial vir

241 The swab testing platform is fast and accurate, simple (samp

242 nfirmed cases with at least one PCR positive swab that is >=45 days after a first-positive swab were

243 international shortage of the nasopharyngeal swabs that are required for collection of optimal specim

244 alternative procedure to sample DNA involves swabbing the skin to collect mucus and epithelial cells.

245 ach participant was swabbed with a reference swab (the control) and a prototype, and SARS-CoV-2 rever

246 d in cervicovaginal lavage and penile meatal swab through high-throughput 16s ribosomal RNA gene ampl

247 ood, saliva and oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal swab) through interaction with active functional groups

248 of a gold nanoparticle (AuNP)-embedded paper swab to extend the capability of Raman spectroscopy to t

249 asal fluid spiked with the virus, moving the swab to viral transport medium (VTM), and sampling a vol

250 n lesions consistent with ophidiomycosis and swabbed to detect O. ophiodiicola DNA using qPCR.

251 t 5 follow-up visits in participants' homes, swabs to detect S. aureus were collected from participan

252 Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media and compariso

253 Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 using nasopharyngeal swabs transported in viral transport media for Cepheid a

254 However, swabbing triggered some longer term changes in zebrafish

255 as also found to be compatible with multiple swab types and, based on accelerated stability studies,

256 sopharyngeal and oropharyngeal (adults only) swabs underwent culture for pneumococci; isolates were s

257 Stool samples and/or rectal swabs underwent molecular serotyping with cycle threshol

258 eduction of viral RNA load in nasopharyngeal swabs up to 7 days after treatment start, patient diseas

259 19) had persistently positive nasopharyngeal swabs up to day 16 of admission.

260 , such as human blood, saliva, sputum, nasal swabs, urine, and plant tissues.

261 The system uses disposable swab vials with phosphorescent oxygen sensors integrated

262 st catch urine (FCU) in MSM and vulvovaginal swabs (VVS) in females, for NG and CT detection.

263 Median time between first and reinfection swab was 64.5 days (range: 45-129).

264 isual detection limit of the MRSA aptasensor swab was less than 100 CFU/ml and theoretically using a

265 hile codetection with other viruses in stool swabs was common (64.4%).

266 Abundance of Lactobacillus in vaginal swabs was correlated with 3TC-TP concentrations in cervi

267 the type-specific HPV viral load in the anal swabs was determined.

268 viral effects, RSV RNA viral load from nasal swabs was quantified over time using reverse-transcripti

269 clinical cultures within 7 days of the nares swab were evaluated for the presence of MRSA.

270 wab that is >=45 days after a first-positive swab were individually investigated for evidence of rein

271 Nasopharyngeal swabs were analyzed by phenotypic and genotypic methods

272 ECs in vaginal swabs were analyzed with cytofluorimetric analysis for p

273 Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected according to WHO recommendations be

274 Nasal/ oropharyngeal swabs were collected and tested for RSV using polymerase

275 Rectal swabs were collected at baseline, 36 months, and 48 mont

276 Respiratory swabs were collected at enrollment to identify and quant

277 clinical signs of trachoma, and conjunctival swabs were collected for C. trachomatis detection and to

278 At each visit, infant buccal swabs were collected for TL measurement, and mothers com

279 In a cross-sectional study, rectal swabs were collected from 177 HIV-infected and 103 HIV-u

280 Vaginal swabs were collected from 93 women (mean age, 23.53 year

281 enous blood and nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs were collected from all cases.

282 re single RSV season in coastal Kenya, nasal swabs were collected from members of 20 households every

283 Conjunctival, nasal and throat swabs were collected from the non-MK groups on a single

284 Saliva swabs were collected prospectively from newborns <21 day

285 Rectal and nasal swabs were collected to quantify HCV-RNA levels within r

286 The performance of 3DP and FLNP swabs were compared in a clinical trial of symptomatic p

287 Swabs were cultured for CPE until September 2017, when d

288 3DP swabs were equivalent to standard FLNP in three testing

289 Swabs were human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyped, and the

290 Microbiome samples from fecal swabs were obtained at weaning (Wean), at mid-test durin

291 uary 2020 and found that 9 of the 640 throat swabs were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by quantitative P

292 Nasal and/or throat swabs were tested by qRT-PCR for common respiratory viru

293 valuated for clinical trachoma, conjunctival swabs were tested for chlamydial infection using GeneXpe

294 Swabs were tested for PeV by reverse-transcription polym

295 Swabs were tested from South African adult subjects, inc

296 was 91%, and 10 724 of 11 606 (92%) expected swabs were tested.

297 Each participant was swabbed with a reference swab (the control) and a protot

298 enteropathogen detection characteristics of swabs with and without visible pigment were as follows:

299 ected by PCR in 687/1150 D. nodosus positive swabs, with a prevalence of 2.6-69.3% of positive swabs

300 revealed by detection of viral RNA in fecal swabs, with sequence analysis documenting genetic stabil