ライフサイエンスコーパス: swabbing

1 d for vaccination with 4CMenB and pharyngeal swabbing.

2 ificantly stronger signals than cheek or gum swabbing.

3 behaviour and welfare after fin clipping and swabbing.

4 both PFGE type and STs during the period of swabbing.

5 al material obtained by rectal or perirectal swabbing.

6 alization (23.15 vs 64.45, P = .004) and PLS swabbing (72.4 vs 144.8, P = .001).

7 n, the presence of biological material after swabbing a fingermark was highlighted, notably by chromo

8 a simple recovery method using acetonitrile swabbing, achieves high reproducibility in detecting chl

9 men who underwent either urethral or meatal swabbing and compared the cellular content and Gram stai

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

11 h then allows the peptide to be recovered by swabbing and extracted for electrospray ionization-mass

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

13 We performed nasopharyngeal or nasal swabbing and/or serum sampling (n = 148) in Lancaster, U

14 PSLs) to investigate skin contamination (via swabbing) and potential inhalational exposure (via breat

15 gets per swab, assessed the impact of serial swabbing, and compared 2 swab types (Copan FLOQSWAB and

16 lesions could be removed easily after gentle swabbing, and most epithelium remained intact.

17 isition, oxygenation requirements at time of swabbing, and patient outcomes.

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

19 ) test based on supervised self-administered swabbing at testing sites.

20 ng did not compromise tissue architecture or swabbing-based sample collection.

21 t nasopharyngeal specimens were collected by swabbing between ages 2 and 24 months.

22 Dropout rates were higher for midturbinate swabbing (biweekly, 11 of 62 participants [18%]; once we

23 er, RV was detected on 79% and NoV on 50% of swabbing dates during the study period.

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

25 Repeated swabbing effectively can eradicate corneal epithelial mi

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

27 ed using ultraviolet light visualization and swabbing followed by microscopy, respectively.

28 h trichiasis were recruited and conjunctival swabbing for bacterial pathogens was performed.

29 orporating specific hospital practices (like swabbing for infections) as well.

30 ith pharyngeal or rectal gonorrhea underwent swabbing from the pharynx or rectum 7 and 14 days follow

31 In prior studies, the sensitivity of tongue swabbing has usually been lower than sputum.

32 First, DNA was sampled by skin swabbing (hereafter skin swabs) individuals from which t

33 erscored the critical role of nasopharyngeal swabbing in virus detection and containment.

34 The large sample size and short swabbing intervals provide a precise description of the

35 Tongue dorsum swabbing is a potential alternative to sputum collection

36 Tongue dorsum swabbing is a promising alternative to sputum collection

37 Although swab-based PCR is sensitive, swabbing is invasive and unpleasant to administer, reduc

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

39 Swabbing led to a smaller change in cortisol release and

40 a CMOS-compatible process, and an efficient swabbing lift-off technique is introduced for the deposi

41 , nonqualified clinicians would oversee self-swabbing making these costs lower.

42 s and a more traditional acid-assisted q-tip swabbing method.

43 m 131 buildings in the United States using a swabbing method.

44 The utility of the DNA obtained by both swabbing methods for individual genotyping was then asse

45 While conventional swabbing methods provide merely a microbial snapshot, an

46 sted that a combination of two less-invasive swabbing methods, such as nasal and oropharyngeal swabs,

47 In contrast to swabbing methods, which sample viral load present on a s

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

49 nd were lower on all but the initial (day 5) swabbing occasions in both experiments.

50 ions in cicatricial trachoma, a conjunctival swabbing of adults in rural Ethiopia was performed.

51 Swabbing of food contact surfaces helps to detect allerg

52 prospective study collected MRSA from nasal swabbing of residents of 26 nursing homes in Orange Coun

53 tion method involving abrasion and moistened swabbing of the genital skin surface for the detection o

54 alues, though after conducting environmental swabbing of the laboratory and verifying with a second i

55 Environmental swabbing of the unit was undertaken after the outbreak,

56 Conjunctival examination and swabbing on 112 females and 36 males were performed.

57 4 years because the effect of pediatric self-swabbing on SARS-CoV-2 test sensitivity is unknown.

58 Traditional methods, such as surface swabbing or tree rolling, are labor-intensive and requir

59 s [34.4%; 95% CI, 26.7%-43.0%]) midturbinate swabbing (P < .001).

60 atic cases that presented during this weekly swabbing period.

61 our unique setting of a school-based throat swabbing program, the illumigene assay did not perform q

62 ce was swabbed three times with standardized swabbing protocol including three different patterns.

63 ssis in conventionally reared sheep by nasal swabbing proved futile with existing selective media bec

64 e skin coupons were used to estimate the PSL swabbing recovery efficiency and limit of detection (LOD

65 for testing among women, using endocervical swabbing samples, 2 M sucrose phosphate transport medium

66 ter vaginal canal) and by different methods (swabbing, scraping, lavaging) from the vaginal tracts of

67 longitudinal household-based nasopharyngeal swabbing study, while accounting for sample misclassific

68 eDNA within tree canopies by using a surface swabbing technique.

69 this study we tested two minimally invasive swabbing techniques for sampling DNA when attaching elec

70 However, viral isolates were obtained by swabbing the cages that housed the geese.

71 Swabbing the corneas of latently infected tree shrews re

72 ollected on a small piece of gauze by gently swabbing the inside of the cheek 3 times.

73 ng the BCs with sterile distilled water, and swabbing the residual water from the AERs after reproces

74 ing our aim, we analyzed samples obtained by swabbing the skin of 15 kidney transplant recipients in

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

76 contaminated swabs and inadequate or shallow swabbing; time taken for sample collection.

77 However, swabbing triggered some longer term changes in zebrafish

78 s (155 HIV-uninfected and 102 PLHIV) had > 1 swabbing visit (median 5 visits [range 2-21]).

79 The mean number of corneal swabbing was 3.3, and the mean disease resolution time w

80 Sponge swabbing was compared to contact plate sampling to asses

81 Weekly swabbing was performed for respiratory pathogen surveill

82 Repeated swabbing was performed if infection persisted or new les

83 Tongue swabbing yielded significantly stronger signals than che