Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Rotblatt, H.

  • Google
  • 1
  • 7
  • 3

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2024Overcoming analytical and preanalytical challenges associated with extragenital home collected STI specimens3citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Greene, Dina
1 / 1 shared
Flynn, R. A.
1 / 1 shared
Muldrow, R. A.
1 / 1 shared
Borenstein, L.
1 / 1 shared
Qi, M.
1 / 2 shared
Hockman, B. E.
1 / 1 shared
Rajagopalan, S.
1 / 2 shared
Chart of publication period
2024

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Greene, Dina
  • Flynn, R. A.
  • Muldrow, R. A.
  • Borenstein, L.
  • Qi, M.
  • Hockman, B. E.
  • Rajagopalan, S.
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Overcoming analytical and preanalytical challenges associated with extragenital home collected STI specimens

  • Greene, Dina
  • Flynn, R. A.
  • Muldrow, R. A.
  • Borenstein, L.
  • Rotblatt, H.
  • Qi, M.
  • Hockman, B. E.
  • Rajagopalan, S.
Abstract

<jats:title>ABSTRACT</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title/><jats:p>Home sample collection for sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening options can improve access to sexual healthcare across communities. For<jats:italic>Chlamydia trachomatis</jats:italic>(CT) and<jats:italic>Neisseria gonorrhoeae</jats:italic>(NG), genital infections have classically been the focus for remote collection options. However, infections may go undiagnosed if sampling is limited to urogenital sites because some individuals only participate in oral and/or anal intercourse. Here we evaluated samples for CT/NG detection after several pre-analytical collection challenges. A paired provider to self-collection validation was performed on rectal [<jats:italic>n</jats:italic>= 162; 22 + for CT and 9 + for NG by provider-collected (PC)] and throat (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic>= 158; 2 + for CT and 11 + for NG by provider-collected) swabs. The positive percent agreement for CT and NG ranged from 90.9% to 100%. The discrepancies were more often positive on self-collected (SC) (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic>= 9 SC+/PC−;<jats:italic>n</jats:italic>= 1 PC+/SC−;<jats:italic>n</jats:italic>= 1 PC+/SC Equiv.;<jats:italic>n</jats:italic>= 2 PC−/SC Equiv.). An empirical limit of detection (LoD) lower than the manufacturer’s claim (0.031 vs 2.5 IFU/mL for CT and 0.063 vs 124.8 CFU/ml for NG, respectively) was used to challenge additional variables. Common hand contaminants, including soap, hand sanitizer, lotion, and sunscreen were added to known positive (3× empirical LoD) or negative samples and did not influence detection. Samples at 2× and 10× the empirical LoD were challenged with extreme temperature cycling and extended room temperature storage. Detection was not affected by these conditions. These results indicate that remote self-collection is an appropriate method of sample acquisition for detecting extragenital CT/NG infections. Additionally, they provide a foundation towards meeting the regulatory standards for commercial testing of home collected extragenital samples.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>IMPORTANCE</jats:title><jats:p>There is a clinical need for expanded extragenital bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing options, but the current regulatory landscape limits the wide-spread promotion and adoption of such services. Improved access, particularly for the LGBTQ+ community, can be achieved by validating testing for specimens that are self-collected at a remote location and arrive at the laboratory via a postal carrier or other intermediary route. Here we provide valuable data showing that self-collected samples for anal and oropharyngeal STI testing are equally or increasingly sensitive compared with those collected by a provider. We systematically consider the effects of storage time, exposure to temperature extremes, and the addition of common toiletries on results.</jats:p></jats:sec>

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • size-exclusion chromatography