Selected article for: "sample detect and significant difference"

Author: Fan, Jian; Yu, Fei; Wang, Xiang; Zou, Qianda; Lou, Bin; Xie, Guoliang; Yang, Xianzhi; Chen, Weizhen; Wang, Qi; Zhang, Dan; Wang, Ruonan; Feng, Baihuan; Dong, Yuejiao; Huang, Li; Teng, Yun; Deng, Zhenzhen; Yu, Ling; Xu, Kaijin; Sheng, Jifang; Zheng, Shufa; Chen, Yu
Title: Hock-a-loogie saliva as a diagnostic specimen for SARS-CoV-2 by a PCR-based assay: a diagnostic validity study
  • Cord-id: x6xm27fc
  • Document date: 2020_10_15
  • ID: x6xm27fc
    Snippet: To clarify the effect of different respiratory sample types on SARS-CoV-2 detection, we collected throat swabs, nasal swabs and hock-a-loogie saliva or sputum, and compared their detection rates and viral loads. The detection rates of sputum (95.65%, 22/23) and hock-a-loogie saliva (88.09%, 37/42) were significantly higher than those in throat swabs (41.54%, 27/65) and nasal swabs (72.31%, 47/65) (P<0.001). The Ct Values of sputum, hock-a-loogie saliva and nasal swabs were significantly higher t
    Document: To clarify the effect of different respiratory sample types on SARS-CoV-2 detection, we collected throat swabs, nasal swabs and hock-a-loogie saliva or sputum, and compared their detection rates and viral loads. The detection rates of sputum (95.65%, 22/23) and hock-a-loogie saliva (88.09%, 37/42) were significantly higher than those in throat swabs (41.54%, 27/65) and nasal swabs (72.31%, 47/65) (P<0.001). The Ct Values of sputum, hock-a-loogie saliva and nasal swabs were significantly higher than that in throat swabs, whereas no significant difference was observed between sputum and saliva samples. Hock-a-loogie saliva are reliable sample types that can be used to detect SARS-CoV-2, and worthy of clinical promotion.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents