ArticlePloS one2014
Some are more equal--a comparative study on swab uptake and release of bacterial suspensions.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Evaluation of an automated molecular diagnostic instrument for direct detection ofJournal of medical microbiology · 2025Article
- Negligible influence of limescale deposits on faucet aerators on measured microorganism loads.European journal of microbiology & immunology · 2025Article
- Viability discrimination of bacterial microbiomes in home kitchen dish sponges using propidium monoazide treatment.Environmental microbiology reports · 2024Article
- Article
- The microbiota as a modulator of mucosal inflammation and HIV/HPV pathogenesis: From association to causation.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- Towards standardized and reproducible research in skin microbiomes.Environmental microbiology · 2022Review
- Source terms for benchmarking models of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via aerosols and droplets.Royal Society open science · 2022Review
- Viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in droplets and bioaerosols directly captured during breathing, speaking and coughing.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Targeted Swabbing of Implant-Associated Biofilm Formation-A Staining-Guided Sampling Approach for Optimizing Routine Microbiological Diagnostics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Commercial Molecular Diagnostic Methods for Detection and Determination of Macrolide Resistance in Mycoplasma pneumoniae.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- The influence of a swab type on the results of point-of-care tests.AMB Express · 2020Article
- Efficient processing of MRSA screening specimens by a modified inoculation protocol.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018Article
- Predictors of colonization with Staphylococcus species among patients scheduled for cardiac and orthopedic interventions at tertiary care hospitals in north-eastern Germany-a prevalence screening study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018Article
- Influence of Broth Enrichment as well as Storage and Transport Time on the Sensitivity of MRSA Surveillance in the Tropics.European journal of microbiology & immunology · 2017Article
- Comparison of vaginal microbiota sampling techniques: cytobrush versus swab.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- More Pathogenicity or Just More Pathogens?-On the Interpretation Problem of Multiple Pathogen Detections with Diagnostic Multiplex Assays.Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Review
- Screening for Gram-negative bacteria: Impact of preanalytical parameters.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Utilizing Moist or Dry Swabs for the Sampling of Nasal MRSA Carriers? An In Vivo and In Vitro Study.PloS one · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSwabs are widely used to collect samples for microbiological analyses from various clinical settings. They vary by material, size, and structure of the tip. This study investigates the uptake and release capacities for liquid and bacteria.
methodsFive swabs were analyzed for their uptake and release capacities of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis suspensions. Two approaches were investigated providing volume-restricted and unrestricted amounts of bacterial suspensions to mimic various clinical situations. Volume and bacterial uptake and release were measured in milligrams and by counting colony forming units (CFU), respectively.
resultsVolume uptake and release in the unrestricted setting varied highly significant between 239.6 mg and 88.7 mg (p<0.001) and between 65.2 mg and 2.2 mg (p<0.001), respectively. In the volume-restricted setting the complete volume was absorbed by all swabs, volume release could only be detected for flocked swabs (2.7 mg; p<0.001). Highest amount of CFU release was detected for the MWE Dryswab in the unrestricted setting for both S. aureus and S. epidermidis with 1544 CFU and 553 CFU, respectively, lowest release for the Sarstedt neutral swab with 32 CFU and 17 CFU, respectively (p<0.001). In the volume-restricted setting MWE Σ-Swab released the highest bacterial amount with 135 CFU S. aureus and 55 CFU S. epidermidis, respectively, the lowest amount was released by Mast Mastaswab with 2 CFU S. aureus and 1 CFU S. epidermidis, respectively (p<0.001). Within the range of the utilized bacterial concentrations, uptake/release ratios were identical for the particular swab types and independent of the bacterial species.
conclusionsThe influence of the swab type on subsequent diagnostic results is often underestimated. Uptake and release of the investigated bacteria vary significantly between different swab types and sampling conditions. For best diagnostic outcome swabs should be chosen according to the examined situation and the swab performance profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.