[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":3,"doc-seo-195410-105":53,"doc-detail-195410-en":126},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,14,19,24,29,34,39,44,49],{"id":8,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":11,"show_sort_weight":12,"slug":13},11,1,"Template","Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":15,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":16,"show_sort_weight":17,"slug":18},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":20,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":21,"show_sort_weight":22,"slug":23},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":25,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":26,"show_sort_weight":27,"slug":28},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":30,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":31,"show_sort_weight":32,"slug":33},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":35,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":36,"show_sort_weight":37,"slug":38},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":40,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":41,"show_sort_weight":42,"slug":43},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":45,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":46,"show_sort_weight":47,"slug":48},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":50,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":51,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":52},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":54,"data":55},"ok",{"site_id":56,"language":57,"slug":58,"title":59,"keywords":60,"description":61,"schema_data":62,"social_meta":119,"head_meta":121,"extra_data":123,"updated_unix":125},105,"en","microbial-sampling-strategies-using-brushed-or-scraped-mucosal-samples-yield-similar-results-to-biopsy-samples-except-for-human-cases","Microbial sampling strategies using brushed or scraped mucosal samples yield similar results to biopsy samples except for human cases","","This study investigates microbial sampling strategies, comparing brushed, scraped, and biopsy methods in mice and humans. The results indicate that brushing or scraping mucosal samples yields comparable data to biopsy samples, with some exceptions noted in human studies. The analysis includes metrics like total read counts, mitochondrial read counts, and filtered read counts, presented through box plots and scatter plots. Covariate analysis, represented by R2 values, further examines the influence of sample type, subsegment, genotype, and phenotype on the data. Additionally, beta-weighted values are presented for various sample types and locations. The scatter plots illustrate the correlation between filtered read counts and bacterial load for both mice and humans, with specific rho and p-FDR values reported for different sampling methods. The findings suggest that less invasive sampling techniques like brushing or scraping are viable alternatives to biopsies for microbial analysis, particularly in research settings, while acknowledging potential nuances in human sample collection.",{"@graph":63,"@context":118},[64,80,101],{"@type":65,"itemListElement":66},"BreadcrumbList",[67,71,74,77],{"item":68,"name":69,"@type":70,"position":9},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":72,"name":10,"@type":70,"position":73},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/",2,{"item":75,"name":51,"@type":70,"position":76},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/general/",3,{"item":78,"name":59,"@type":70,"position":79},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/microbial-sampling-strategies-using-brushed-or-scraped-mucosal-samples-yield-similar-results-to-biopsy-samples-except-for-human-cases/195410/",4,{"url":78,"name":59,"@type":81,"image":82,"author":87,"headline":59,"publisher":90,"fileFormat":93,"inLanguage":57,"description":61,"dateModified":94,"datePublished":95,"encodingFormat":93,"isAccessibleForFree":96,"interactionStatistic":97},"DigitalDocument",{"url":83,"@type":84,"width":85,"height":86},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/microbial-sampling-strategies-using-brushed-or-scraped-mucosal-samples-yield-similar-results-to-biopsy-samples-except-for-human-cases/195410.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":88,"@type":89},"wps_ap_test_251126_0180","Person",{"url":68,"name":91,"@type":92},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-09-25","2026-09-03",true,{"@type":98,"interactionType":99,"userInteractionCount":76},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":100},"ViewAction",{"@type":102,"mainEntity":103},"FAQPage",[104,110,114],{"name":105,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":107},"What are the main findings regarding microbial sampling strategies?","Question",{"text":108,"@type":109},"The study found that brushing or scraping mucosal samples generally yields similar results to biopsy samples in both mice and humans, with notable differences observed in human samples. This suggests less invasive methods are often comparable to traditional biopsies.","Answer",{"name":111,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":112},"What metrics were used to compare the different sampling methods?",{"text":113,"@type":109},"The comparison involved analyzing total read counts, mitochondrial read counts, and filtered read counts to assess the quality and quantity of microbial data obtained from each sampling method.",{"name":115,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Were there any differences observed between mice and humans in the study?",{"text":117,"@type":109},"Yes, while brushing and scraping were largely comparable to biopsies in mice, there were some exceptions identified when applying these methods to human samples, indicating potential species-specific considerations.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":78,"og:type":120,"og:title":59,"og:site_name":91,"og:description":61},"article",{"robots":122,"canonical":78},"index,follow",{"doc_id":124,"site_id":56},195410,1789973640,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":127},{"doc_id":124,"user_id":128,"nickname":88,"user_avatar":129,"doc_module":9,"category_id":50,"category_name":51,"doc_title":59,"doc_description":61,"doc_content":60,"file_id":130,"file_url":131,"file_type":132,"file_size":133,"view_count":76,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":9,"is_downloadable":9,"audit_status":9,"page_count":40,"language":134,"language_code":57,"site_id":56,"html_lang":57,"table_of_contents":135,"faqs":136,"seo_title":137,"seo_description":61,"update_tm":138,"read_time":139},8796095027276,"https://avatar.qwps.com/avatar/d3BzX2FwX3Rlc3RfMjUxMTI2XzAxODA=","cbCaihSYcOfobsDZ","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihSYcOfobsDZ","pdf",5758954,"English","# Introduction\n## Methods\n### Mouse Models\n### Human Samples\n## Results\n### Read Counts and Mitochondrial Content\n### Covariate Analysis\n### Correlation with Bacterial Load\n## Discussion","[{\"question\":\"What are the main findings regarding microbial sampling strategies?\",\"answer\":\"The study found that brushing or scraping mucosal samples generally yields similar results to biopsy samples in both mice and humans, with notable differences observed in human samples. This suggests less invasive methods are often comparable to traditional biopsies.\"},{\"question\":\"What metrics were used to compare the different sampling methods?\",\"answer\":\"The comparison involved analyzing total read counts, mitochondrial read counts, and filtered read counts to assess the quality and quantity of microbial data obtained from each sampling method.\"},{\"question\":\"Were there any differences observed between mice and humans in the study?\",\"answer\":\"Yes, while brushing and scraping were largely comparable to biopsies in mice, there were some exceptions identified when applying these methods to human samples, indicating potential species-specific considerations.\"}]","Microbial sampling strategies using brushed or scraped mucosal samples yield similar results to biopsy samples except for human cases | PDF",1788448233,6]