Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
24
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
24 results for “nasopharyngeal swabs”
A Combined approach of MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry and multivariate analysis as a potential tool for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus in nasopharyngeal swabs.
<p>The spectra were provided as unprocessed raw data in the manufacturers data format (Bruker), as labelled two zip archives with SARS CoV 2 positives and negative, according to the reviewer's recommendation.</p> <p>This information belongs to the publication (in review in <em>Journal of Virological Methods</em>)<br> "A Combined approach of MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry and multivariate analysis as a potential tool for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 virus in nasopharyngeal swabs"<br> All the information belongs to the National Reference Institute, INEI-ANLIS DR CARLOS G MALBRAN, BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA.</p>
Nasopharyngeal swabs vs. saliva sampling for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A cross-sectional survey of acceptability for caregivers and children after experiencing both methods
<p><span>Background: </span><span>Saliva sampling is a promising alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing, but acceptability data is lacking. We characterize the acceptability of saliva sampling and nasopharyngeal swabs for primary decision makers and their children after experiencing both testing modalities.</span></p> <p><span>Results: </span><span>48 participants and 48 primary decision makers completed the survey. Nasopharyngeal swab acceptability differed between scenarios, ranging 79% [95%CI: 66, 88] to 100% [95%CI: 95, 100]); saliva sampling acceptability was similar across scenarios, ranging 92% [95%CI: 82, 97]) to </span><span> </span><span>98% [95%CI: 89, 99]. 58% of youth described significant pain with nasopharyngeal swabbing, versus none with saliva sampling. 90% of children prefer saliva sampling. 66% of primary decision makers would prefer nasopharyngeal swabbing if it were 10% more sensitive.</span></p> <p><span>Conclusion: </span><span>Though youth prefer saliva sampling over nasopharyngeal swabs, primary decision makers present for testing remain highly accepting of both. Acceptance of nasopharyngeal swabs, however, varies with the testing indication and is influenced by perceived test accuracy. Understanding factors that influence sampling acceptance will inform more successful testing strategies.</span></p>
PCR and Rapid Diagnostic Test on Saliva and Nasopharyngeal Swabs for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04613310. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
COVID-19 Tests: Nasopharyngeal Swab vs Saliva Collected With Salivette® Cortisol for Viral RNA Sampling for RT-qPCR
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04599959. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Nasopharyngeal Swabs by Using Multi-Spectral Screening System
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04860895. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Comparison of Nasopharyngeal Swab v. Nasopharyngeal Saline Wash or Saliva Collection in Testing for Respiratory Viruses
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT05864118. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 5.
Nasopharyngeal swabs vs. saliva sampling for SARS-CoV-2 detection: A cross-sectional survey of acceptability for caregivers and children after experiencing both methods
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Concordance between PCR-based extraction-free saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing
<p><b>Introduction</b>: Saliva represents a less invasive alternative to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. SalivaDirect is a nucleic acid extraction-free method for detecting SARS-CoV2 in saliva specimens. <span>Studies evaluating the concordance of gold standard NPS and newly developed SalivaDirect protocols are limited</span>. The aim of our study was to assess SalivaDirect as an alternative method for COVID-19 testing.</p> <p><b>Methods</b>: Matching NPS and saliva samples were analysed from a cohort of symptomatic (n=127) and asymptomatic (n=181) participants recruited from hospital and university settings respectively. RNA was extracted from NPS while saliva samples were subjected to the SalivaDirect protocol before RT-qPCR analysis. The presence of SARS-Cov-2 was assessed using <i>RdRP</i> and <i>N1</i> gene targets in NPS and saliva respectively.</p> <p><b>Results</b>: Overall we observed 94.3% sensitivity (95% CI 87.2-97.5%), and 95.9% specificity (95% CI 92.4-97.8%) in saliva when compared to matching NPS samples. Analysis of concordance demonstrated 95.5% accuracy overall for the saliva test relative to NPS, and a very high level of agreement (κ coefficient = 0.889, 95% CI 0.833–0.946) between the two sets of specimens. Fourteen of 308 samples were discordant, all from symptomatic patients. Ct values were >30 in 13/14 and >35 in 6/14 samples. No significant difference was found in the Ct values of matching NPS and saliva sample (<i>p</i>=0.860). A highly significant correlation (r = 0.475, <i>p</i><0.0001) was also found between the Ct values of the concordant positive saliva and NPS specimens.</p> <p><b>Conclusions</b>: Use of saliva processed according to the SalivaDirect protocol represents a valid method to detect SARS-CoV-2. Less invasive and accurate saliva screening is an attractive alternative to current testing methods based on NPS and would afford greater capacity to test asymptomatic populations especially in the context of frequent testing.</p>
Clinical Validation of New Injection Molded Flocked Nasopharyngeal Swabs in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04368260. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Concordance between PCR-based extraction-free saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Conjunctival Swab vs Nasopharyngeal Swab in Patients With COVID-19
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04444596. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Therapeutic Play Before Nasopharyngeal Swabbing in Children
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT06262984. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Study of the Effect of Systematic Screening of Residents and Caregivers With Covid-19 by Nasopharyngeal Swab (RT-PCR)
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT05085522. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Comparison of Detection of SARS-CoV2 (COVID-19) Between Nasopharyngeal Swab Specimens and Those Obtained by Salivary Sputum
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT05024461. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
COVIDISC: Rapid Diagnostic Tests on Nasopharyngeal Swabs for the Detection of COVID-19
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04703140. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Detection of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) in the Semen of COVID+ Patients (Positive RT-PCR on a Nasopharyngeal Swab)
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04460534. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Xylocaine to Freeze During Unpleasant Nasopharyngeal Swabs
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04901065. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Concordance Between Buccal Cavity Swab and Nasopharyngeal Swab for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Detection by RT-PCR and ELISA
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04732637. IPD Sharing: UNDECIDED. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Optimal Length for Nasal Mid-turbinate and Nasopharyngeal Swabs
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04840082. IPD Sharing: UNDECIDED. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Reproducibility and Reliability of Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV) DNA/RNA Measures in Nasopharyngeal Swabs
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01972815. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.