Screening - Science topic
Screening, in medicine, is a strategy used in a population to detect a disease in individuals without signs or symptoms of that disease. Unlike what generally happens in medicine, screening tests are performed on persons without any clinical sign of disease.
Questions related to Screening
I am trying to do a spatial panel data analysis for Turkey Level 3 regions, but when I save the files from data.humdata.org in Stata, the error appears on the screen that the files are not compatible with Stata format. Stata does not accept these files with an out-of-format warning. Where do I need to upload these files in the program?
We are researchers from University of Illinois. We are recruiting adults who have NOT used any crypto wallets (e.g., MetaMask) to evaluate the user experience of a crypto wallet. There is a $30 compensation! Please fill out this short screening survey: https://ischoolillinois.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3t0IdsCLPRxfFlk
- I am currently working on Mycobacterium diagnosis in bovines. I have tested clinical samples via conventional PCR screening with genus (16S rDNA gene) and MTB complex (IS0 1081 gene). I found the results that some of the samples were positive for the genus but negative for the MTB complex (having nine members including M. bovis, M. tuberculosis, M. orygis etc.) and vice versa. why it should happen that the genus primer is negative but MTB complex gives positive results? please explain.
Hey all, I'm an undergrad REU student at the University of Minnesota who's working on an independent project with the floral microbiome of Clarkia xantiana. I'm interested in the microbial diversity of the floral microbiome across a spatial range (i.e how different the floral microbiome of clarkia is from subpopulation to subpopulation) and whether a recently diverged subspecies of clarkia we're putting out in the field is picking up bacteria from the natural populations through some means (pollinators would be the most interesting, hybridization data is coming later so I might be able to see whether Clarkia xantiana ssp. parviflora we put out in the field are getting bacteria present on natural Clarkia xantiana after receiving natural Clarkia xantiana pollen and hybridizing). I've put this project together with the goal of characterizing the microbiome of flowers I have collected with the original workflow going something like this: Sample collection > sequencing > microbe species identification + measures of evenness and diversity of microbial species present on flowers. However, sequencing will not be possible by the end of the summer (I'd have to pool my samples with a grad student who is also doing sequencing after the summer is over to save money), and I'm looking at alternate methods of microbial characterization. One of these would be to develop a screening procedure with many different kinds of differential media, to determine what bacterial species are present in my samples. There are an almost infinite number of media to choose from, and without some preliminary sequencing data I'm a little lost as to what bacteria to even look for with my media. Acinetobacter would possibly be present (maybe Acinetobacter pollinis) and presence of saporophytes could indicate degradation or growth while samples were frozen in glycerine (failed preservation method). Staph or pseudomonas could also be a contaminant to screen for.
How might one go about devising a screening suite of differential media to inoculate with bacteria from my environmental samples? Should I say to hell with differential media, throw my samples in with the sequencing runs and be content with a smaller dataset to analyze at a later date (the 'success' of my experiment is not so important, except for my own personal satisfaction)? Or should I do more research into other methods of identification, like MALDI-TOF? Could really use the help!
I am planning a systematic review. For my last review, I searched different databases and uploaded the hits to my profile on covidence.org. However, their free trial now only allows 500 citations to be uploaded. I loved covidence's interface for very quick manual screening on titles, however, it's too expensive. Does anyone know of a free alternative, which is equally efficient for fast screening? Thanks in advance.
Q1. We have screened 120 cotton hybrids under two summer temperature regimes and recorded data for around 30 traits including morphological, physiological and quality traits, further, I want to study the behavioural changes of these traits which are ultimately responsible for the yield difference across two summer temperature regimes. Please help me to compare the two sets of means for 30 traits with suitable statistical analysis.
Q2. We also have data for 22 parents (Varieties) and their 120 hybrids, kindly suggest me a suitable statistical analysis for comparing parents and hybrids for 30 traits.
I have basic idea of handling Vivado IDE but I need a resource from where I can understand those features which I generally don't use even it often comes on the screen. So please suggest for the same(other than Xilinx docs).
screening for herbicide resistance and identify genomic regions associated with it in maize
wanna check the group differences in several category variables using chi-square; the differences were all significant, which shall not be the case as to the data screening
As stated, I would like to know what is the difference between NCBI blast and EzBioCloud?
I have sequences of multiple unknown bacteria and am trying to do the first identification on them using only the 16s sequence by sanger sequencing. Once they have been screened, I will pick the one that looks interested to move forward with the characterization.
However, when I tried to use these two services, I have gotten a bit different results.
For example, in NCBI blast, the sample I have generated more than 10 hits that have < 99% identity. However, in EzBioCloud, I can only get one hit up to 98.99% of similarity and it doesn't have a strain name or taxon name. The highest one with strain name and taxon name only has 97.91% similarity. Therefore, I don't know if this one can be considered a potential novel strain or if someone might already have isolated and identity it.
I was wondering what's the difference? Thank you.
IDRS as an effective screening tool for diabetes at community level uses four parameters Age , physical activity , Abdominal circumference , Family history, with sensitivity of 95.12% and specificity of 28.95% in predicting the risk of diabetes with score more than 60.Are there are other community level screening tools in different countries . What are the parameters used in them?
Most experts agree that adults should limit screen time to less than two hours per day outside of work-related activities. Excessive screen time not only produces its own negative effects like eye strain and headaches, but it also steals time from more healthful pursuits like forging real-world connections and exercise.
I usually spend 3-4 hours on screen besides work related activities and I am trying to reduce it.
I am part of a lab doing flow cytometry on blood samples from mice inflicted with TBI. Does anyone have a protocol for this? Also, any suggestions on markers/antigens to screen for?
Later this year I will be conducting a repeated measures longitudinal experiment designed to quantify the long-term impact of Mixed Reality displays as user interfaces for viewing flight procedures/checlists on drone piloting performance.
Prior to testing, participants will receive training from instructors, and over the course of this training period, will execute 2 different drone flights (as shown in the image attached as 'Position Flight' and Traverse Flight').
Participants will be randomly assigned into 1 of 2 groups - the 'Hololens First' group, or the 'Screen First' group (an LCD screen is the control display condition). I will also be ensuring that an equal number of participants are assigned to each group.
Following the completion of the training flights, participants will perform three subsequent test flights:
- Test Session 1 will involve participants executing 2 different flights not seen in training (shown in the image attached as 'Orbit Flight' and 'Recon Flight'), and will take place roughly 5 minutes after the completion of training.
- Test Session 2 involves participants returning 10 days after Test Session 1 to conduct the same flights they executed in Test Session 1 (Orbit Flight and Recon Flight).
- Test Session 3 involves participants returning 180 days after Test Session 1 to conduct the same flights they executed in Test Session 1 (Orbit Flight and Recon Flight).
My question, therefore, is do I need to randomise my participants into the Hololens First group or the Screen First group prior to each test (i.e. randomise participants before Test Session 1, randomise them again before Test Session 2, and finally, randomise before Test Session 3), or if it is okay to randomly assign participants to one of these groups prior to their training flights commence - with participants remaining in either the Hololens First Group or the Screen First Group for the entire duration of the experiment?
Thanks a lot in advance for your help - it is much appreciated!
I have designed the optimization experiment using Box-Behnken approach.
What should I do if any of the factors combination fails, for example because the aggregation occurs.
Should I review whole optimization or is there any method to skip the particular factors combination?
And if I need to review the whole experiment, what method should I use to evaluate boundary factors values? Screening methods I have seen require at least 6 factors to be screened.
Any help is appreciated.
I am currently doing a reaction where the reagent releases the Cl+ to generate an active species. So this liberated Cl+ is killing some of my starting material by doing the unwanted N-Chlorination. I was thinking of screening some potential halogen scavenger reagents & screened some of them (trimethoxybenezene, mesitylene, phenol, aniline, indole, pyrrole, etc.) but have still not been able to complete suppress this side reaction. But the data shows that it is working to some extent. So could you all advise some halogen+ scavenger reagents to screen further?
Thank you in advance.
It is my observation that the RG Score has encouraged members to contribute expert scientific answers on the discussion threads, because Answers can raise one's RG Score each week, while posting scientific research Articles carries less weight, because the non-discussion thread portion of one's RG Score depends quite heavily on the number of Reads and Recommendations which any posted article in a specialized field may receive. Time is also a factor, because the discussion threads are more readily accessible so that one can participate and contribute one's expert scientific opinions everyday and for as long as one is able, but researching and writing a scientific paper requires a significant amount of time, not to mention the wait-time during the submission, editorial screening, peer review, proofreading, press run and distribution processes.
Hello! I am looking for a yeast-2-hybrid kit to buy for testing protein-protein interaction. By kit I mean something that comes with the vectors, the controls as well as the yeast strains. I have been using the LexA and ACT2.2 vectors and L40 yeast strain but since I'm facing some issues with the system, I was planning to buy a similar kit from a trusted source/company. I want to mention that I'm not doing library screens but just want to test protein-protein interactions between different proteins.
Zones which are greater use for quantitative screening. And don't know how to measure it's size.
I am a newbie with Hybridoma fusion and selection via ELISA and would be greatful for some tips for a screening problem I have.
I completed the fusion successfully last week and there were colonies growing in a lot of the wells. I started the screening yesterday with the first 100 clones via ELISA for my target protein.
I have done this ELISA multiple times with mouse sera and it works fine- no background etc. But in screening my hybridoma supernatants i got a signal in all of the wells... I block with 5% FCS overnight at 4°C (minimum 16 hours). I guess I have a high concentration of antibodies from the supernatant binding the plate, but I don't know what would be the best option to stop this considering blocking is already quite long?
There were about 3 wells that were particularly positive in the ELISA and I decided to expand these in the hopes these were positive above the background of the plate. However, when i check these wells, there are clearly other adherent fusiform cells/ contamination? growing in these in all 3 wells (see attached pics). Can anyone suggest what this contamination is? and why it would give such a strong signal in the ELISA?
Thanks in advance
Hi all, I am a PhD student trying to look at molecular changes in neuronal cultures using WB. We have had some issues in getting results and oftentimes we just get a grey screen with no bands at all. However, using the same antibodies and protocol other times we see the bands. We have changed the buffers, membrane type, protein samples, primary and secondary Ab, ECL, skim milk to BSA…and still sometimes we get just a grey screen. Does anyone have any idea?
working on find the new potent lead compound and to work on anti cancer activity
I work with transgenic plants that we transform using agrobacterium. When calli produce tissues, I screen the tissues using PCR. Lately, I have been using thermofisher's Direct PCR. Through the past year, we have had no issues with the kit or with our positive controls.
I have been trying to screen plant shoots since April. These plants were transformed using agro with a PHA vector. There are five separate PHA vectors. For a positive control, we use the appropriate PHA plasmid (i.e. if the calli transformed with PHA 231 produces shoots and we are screening them, I would use the PHA 231 plasmid as the positive control). The plasmid stocks worked well the last time I used them, so confirm PHA vector insertion through a triparental mating protocol. My positive controls were bright and consistent in my agarose gels! This was in October 2021 and November 2021.
Since I have started screening plant shoots, the plasmids are not consistently producing bands. These are the same plasmid extractions used in October 2021 and November 2021. We have extracted new plasmids from E.coli plates and they are not working either. I have prepared reactions for separate PCR machines to determine if there is a problem with the machine. I have run other reactions (with different samples, primers, and positive controls) to see if there is a problem with the machine or my technique. These reactions work fine without contamination. The positive controls show up fine.
Sometimes, the PHA plasmids will produce positive bands. Sometimes, the same plasmid will not produce a band.. I don't know what the problem is.. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I can provide more information or gel photos if needed.
Project Title: Exploring the properties of the Accessible AQ in children.
I am currently recruiting participants to take part in my final year dissertation research project. I am investigating the properties of an accessible version of an autism screening tool (the Autism Quotient) when used with children.
The study has received ethical approval from Northumbria University (Ref:44763) and all data will be kept secure and anonymous.
We are looking for participants that:
- • are aged 18 years or over;
- • are able to give informed consent;
- • have a child aged between 6 and 17;
- • Your child does not have to have a diagnosis of autism to take part.
The study will involve:
- • Completing a few questions asking for demographic information about you and your child, such as age and gender.
- • Completion of two questionnaires about your child. The first is a screening tool (the AQ) that measures autistic like traits, such as preferring set routines. These traits can be found among the general population to different degrees. The second is a screening tool for learning disability. These will take approximately 10 minutes to complete.
- • Your child will be asked to complete two short questionnaires that are ‘easy read’ versions of the AQ.
If you have any further questions regarding the study, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org
To find out more information about the study and to take part, please go to: https://nupsych.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8zYLleeCRtFvKWG
A 27 year-old married woman was admitted due to pain in lower abdomen for 7 days. USG revealed a multilobbed and multiloculated cyst in the left lower quadrant. During laparotomy, the parietal peritoneum was found thick. It was opened. A cystic lesion containing straw colored fluid was found. loculi were broken. Biopsy was taken. She had amenorrhoea for last one year.
I am trying to screen HEK293T cells by immunofluorescence and even though I coat the 96 well plates with poly-l-lysine (pll)after multipe washes (being very careful) there are few cells left. Has anyone fround anything better than pll?
Objective: Identify the best metal complex and reaction condition for getting the target product with maximum yield.
Question: While optimizing the reaction conditions for a particular reaction, catalyzed by synthesized transition metal complex, what kind of order would be better?
a. Fix a metal complex and screen all other conditions initially (like solvent, oxidant, time, etc.,). Then finally screen the 10 different metal complexes?
b. Fix all the reagents (provided the reaction is happening) and screen all the metal complexes first. Then screen the different reagents?
Note: The no. of synthesized complexes = 10
With a model reaction condition based on the literature, the catalytic activity of the first complex is confirmed.
I was working on a thesis project on a portable ECG device, I checked these
So it was basically biopotential->Amplifier->logging->displaying using Teensy(Programmable chip), Adafruit(Bluetooth Module), SPI LCD Screen, and resistors and capacitors.
I developed and assembled all except Teensy, adafruit, SPI LCD screen, as I don't have circuit on how to connect output to these 3 devices.
Can anyone share some other resources it would be very much valuable.
I'm working on docking with Autodock Vina in Chimera. When I try to reopen a session I saved with .py or .pyc extensions, the type selection screen is opened for the designation of file type.
Which file type should I choose? Or is there something I need to do to avoid this screen?
I really appreciate your interest and help.
I need to device an experiment with the n-Back Pointing task without any hardware complement; e.g., no tablet to execute the reaching movements or computer touch screen to select the presumed correct items. The paradigm should be consistent with an ambulatory setting, as a traditional neuropsychological test.
Thanks in advance.
I performed a study where i screened for a certain rare disease in an animal population. The number of animals screened was 503, and the test I used had a sensitivity of 99%. I was asked, what disease prevalence my study could detect given the sensitivity of this test and the number of animals i have screened. I am struggling with this question, and appreciate if anyone can help with it. Thanks!
Dear community of researchers,
I am currently working on a small research project that will explore community- and patient-led strategies for increasing referral of diabetes and hypertension and raising awareness of these two diseases in Mozambique, a highly resource-constrained country.
I would like to ask:
- does anyone have knowledge on patient-led referral strategies and advocacy activities? If so, could you please share any relevant links and/or are you aware of any recommendations on this from international health organisations?
- do you believe that involving patients in such activities would be ethically appropriate? Why/ why not?
Thank you in advance for any replies.
I will be grateful if you could share with me the screening tool that you use in your diabetes clinic to screen for any mental health problems among children and young people live with T1DM.
Thanking you in advance
All the best
I am doing research (Master Thesis) on a new topic, which is: “Blockchain, Accounting, and Auditing”. Where the topic will be addressed in its broad form and does not specialize in a specific part only. And I found that the previous research is more than 100 research. Do I show it in its entirety in the Literature Review or are there certain conditions for screening?
I did a qualitative screening of 2 plants extracts. And both plants showed a negative result for polyphenol but positive for flavonoids. I know flavonoids are a class of polyphenols so I'm a bit confused on how to interpret that. And take into account that the quantitative screening for TPC (total phenolic content) shows results.
My supervisors have asked me to seek advice from external experts in the field of human factors, augmented reality, psychology etc. to see if the wording of my hypotheses makes sense prior to commencing data collection in the coming weeks.
In my experiment, I will be training participants to execute drone flights (using the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Open Test Lane) while viewing flight procedures on a nearby screen (Condition 1), on a Microsoft Hololens 2 (Condition 2), and having them read aloud by a non-flying co-pilot while wearing an EPSON Moverio BT-300 headset (Condition 3).
On Training/Testing Day 1, participants will perform a series of training flights to familiarise themselves with the drone controls, and will also acquaint themselves with operating a drone under each of the three conditions mentioned above. Immediately following the completion of training, they will execute three different drone flights (1 flight per condition) and their baseline performance recorded.
This is a repeated-measures, within-subject experiment design, so participants will execute the same flight procedures (in a randomised order to facilitate counterbalancing and eliminate any learning/practice effect) under the exact same conditions as the test flights on Testing Day 1.
We will be measuring participants total elapsed flight time, as well as the number of errors they make on each flight. Thus, we expect that participants will execute the drone flights significantly faster and with significantly fewer errors while using the Moverio compared to when they use Hololens and the digital screen.
In addition to this, participants will return 4 days later to perform the same flights, and one final time 6 months later which will allow us to see how participant performance compares over time across all three conditions.
Therefore, my core hypotheses are as follows:
1. We hypothesise that using a heads-up, head-worn AR display (i.e. EPSON Moverio) to view drone flight procedures would result in better long-term retention of a newly acquired motor skill than using a head-worn AR display, or an LCD screen.
2. We hypothesise that using a heads-up, head-worn AR display (i.e. EPSON Moverio) to view drone flight procedures following a training-performance interval of approximately 6 months would result in participants making significantly fewer errors in the execution of a newly acquired motor skill than using a head-worn AR display, or an LCD screen.
I am attaching a series of images visualising and hopefully clarifying all of what I have said above. However, if you have any comments or queries of your own please make them know here in your responses and I will be happy to share more information.
Thank you all in advance for taking the time to help me out, it's very much appreciated.
COVID-19 is mainly a respiratory disease that affects the lung, although other organ structures with endothelium seems to be affected too.
When should we do imaging?
What is the aim of the imaging?
How can it help with management?
Do you agree with the following consensus statement?
How will you adjust your own practice and difficulties encountered? Why?
The Role of Chest Imaging in Patient Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multinational Consensus Statement from the Fleischner Society. Chest. 2020 Apr 07.
I am currenctly trying to crystalize a protein with the His tag. My protein has precipitated after buffer exchange but my supervisor said it is ok. After a screen gave us some hits, I tried to range the pH and the PEG concentration in a new 24-well plate. Some drops look very oily-like, like it has been liquid-liquid phase separaration, while others seem to have clusters/aggregates of the protein. The thing is that I took protein precipitate from the Eppendorf in all cases. Anyone has any idea what happens or how I can resolve this?
#crystallography #drop #screening
Good day we have a serological ELISA test we commonly use for screening herds for a viral infection with an established cutoff for use in individual animals. We wish to investigate the AUC of the test when we mix equal volumes of 1 positive test and 2 negatives (pool of 3) and 1 positive and 4 negatives (pool of 5). I am willing to recalculate the sample size after the initial attempt and add more if necessary. Just wondered what the equation is for a non-pooled AUC and then pooled if there is one? R package if there is one?
Your computer was infected with my malware, RAT (Remote Administration Tool), your browser wasn't updated / patched, in such case it's enough to just visit some website where my iframe is placed to get automatically infected, if you want to find out more - Google: "Drive-by exploit".
My malware gave me full access and control over your computer, meaning, I got access to all your accounts (see password above) and I can see everything on your screen, turn on your camera or microphone and you won't even notice about it. I collected all your private data and I RECORDED YOU (through your webcam) SATISFYING YOURSELF! After that I removed my malware to not leave any traces. I can send the video to all your contacts, post it on social network, publish it on the whole web, including the darknet, where the sick people are, I can publish all I found on your computer everywhere! Only you can prevent me from doing this and only I can help you out in this situation. Transfer exactly 500$ with the current bitcoin (BTC) price to my bitcoin address. It's a very good offer, compared to all that horrible shit that will happen if I publish everything!
I am doing research on varietal screening of rice germplasm against brown plant hopper and white-backed plant hopper under field condition. According to IRRI standard evaluation system for rice, the screening of rice germplam against these pests based on its symptom i.e. hopper burn. Therefore, my question is how can differentiate the symptom "Hooper burn" whether it is caused by BPH or WBPH.
For doing LCMS analysis of metabolites from crude samples of seeds, what is the procedure for fixing internal standards? Do we do multiple screenings until we get a detectable concentration peak of the standard and then use that for further analysis?
For my current research project, a rapid scoping review, I am looking at different software tools aiding the systematic review process. After having read a systematic review on the topic:
with kind regards
Hi fellow pioneers,
I was wondering if there is a good strategy for designing a set of experiments to find the factors with the most effect on the response, which is nominal (yes/no, pass/fail type of response) instead of the typical continuous response? While for nominal response a logistic regression can be performed on available data, I doubt the usual factorial/fractional factorial design still works in this case (since they are meant for continuous response). What would be a suitable approach in this case? Kindly point me to any relevant terms/theories if anything comes to mind.
Thanks in advance.
I face the following error:
Undefined function 'Screen' for input arguments of type 'char'. Error in IB_BaselineAction (line 29) Screen('Preference', 'VisualDebuglevel', 0);
I am screening soybean genotypes for drought tolerance and vulnerability in a screen house. Some literature suggests 3 weeks and others suggest 4 weeks of drought imposition.
I can play video using PTB on MATLAB. However, as you can see by Simplemoviedemo, the movie frame is quite small. How can I play it on the whole screen?
I would appreciate for you help.
In our daily drug analysis. We note sometimes the screening results are higher than the confirmation. For example, THC is in most time the screening concentration is higher than the confirmation.
Any answer or comment is really appreciated.
Currently, I am studying the working on the OLED screens in detail. I have come across various layers of systems, for example, HIL, HTL, ETL, EIL and EML. I have studied that each layer has energy difference in it. Why that is? is it necessary? why can't we directly connect the Emissive layer to the Anode and Cathode? what is the role of the energy barrier in it? I am adding one image with this question.
Basically just what the questions asks. Are there any programs developed for this aspect? I will have individuals screening/eliminating articles and I was curious what the best fashion would be to extract them and then to screen for abstract/full text where everyone could access the files. I used Zotero in the past but this next one I am to embark upon will have a much steeper load in terms of articles extracted. Thank you for your time!
*Question for psychtoolbox users*
I using one screen. The function "flip" flips all screen. Can i divided the screen to two areas of "flip"? I have two stimuli with different time display flipping one of them flips both of them. Any suggestions how to solve this?
I am looking for information self-administered cognitive screening test that have been used for online studies without direct contact with participants due to the need for completely anonymised data (meaning, no interviews required).
I'd be very grateful for your help!
Is it possible to obtain a value different to zero when we evaluate a phenolic content in a plant extract which phytochemical screening didn't show it? If yes, what can be the reason for that ?
The sample was subjected to centrifugatiin at 9500 rpm for 10 min before being subjected to analysis through a UV spectro
Attached is the screen shot for the same with the bottom most spectra for blank sample and top most after 30 min degradation
How many chances of acceptance of a research paper if journals editor send it to review .
Especially for top journal indexed
I've been struggling with assembling a 30 kb (20 kb vector, AmpR + 10 kb PCR product) construct. Any helpful tips would be much much appreciated!
I have tried traditional RE (MluI/FseI) cloning, Gibson assembly (60 bp overlaps), and both strategies failed. I've tried electroporation with ElectroMAX DH10B, Stbl4, 10-beta from NEB for higher transformation efficiency. To give it one last try, I'm using NEBuilder HiFi DNA assembly, but it doesn't look promising. To improve screening (lots of AmpR false positives earlier), I also cloned a Neo/Kan resistance into my 10kb fragment in advance, and screened for colonies that are Kanamycin resistant.
As of now, I'm seriously considering subcontracting this project to a pair of more capable/experienced Molbio hands. Does anyone know a company that have expertises in making tailored large constructs, and have good experiences with it?
We have screened the phytochemicals of Tinospora cardifolia and curcuma longa downloaded from Imppat database and Dr. Dukes database and targeted TGFbeta-R1 crystal structure using docking study and found one best compound from each quercetin from c.longa and tembetarine from T.cardifolia , Inorder ro test the compound to test invitro & invivo, we wish to purchase from chemical vendors but we found the compounds source from other plant species (Apis mellifera) but structure remains same for both cases. Is it a valid study if we conduct a study based on this
link : Quercetin ≥95% (HPLC), solid | 117-39-5 (sigmaaldrich.com)
As part of a research project for the early detection of the risk of post-/long-Covid, we would like to find suitable biomediators with high predictive power for screening diagnostics. For this purpose, a longer-term observational study in Covid patients is planned. A key objective of the planned study is to clarify an early indication for the rehabilitation treatment of Post-Covid syndromes.
I need to buy Rhodamine B for lipase producing bacteria screening. They are available from Sigma-Aldrich in different forms such as HPLC, for fluorescence and standard analytical. Which one should I use?