Validity of the Use of Wrist and Forehead Temperatures in Screening the General Population for COVID-19: A Prospective Real-World Study
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background: We aimed to compare the accuracy of individuals’ wrist and forehead temperatures with their tympanic temperature under different circumstances. Methods: We performed a prospective observational study in a real-life population in Ningbo First Hospital in China. We consecutively recorded individuals’ wrist and forehead temperatures in Celsius (°C) using a noncontact infrared thermometer (NCIT). We also measured individuals’ tympanic temperature using a tympanic thermometer (IRTT) and defined fever as a tympanic temperature of ≥37.3 °C. Results: We enrolled 528 participants, including 261 indoor and 267 outdoor participants. We grouped the outdoor participants into four groups according to their means of transportation to the hospital: by foot, by bicycle/electric vehicle, by car, or as a passenger in a car. Under different circumstances, the mean difference in the forehead measurement ranged from -1.72 to -0.56 °C across groups, and that in the wrist measurement ranged from -0.96 to -0.61°C. Both measurements had high fever screening abilities in indoor patients. (Wrist: AUC 0.790; 95% CI: 0.725-0.854, P<0.001; forehead: AUC 0.816; 95% CI: 0.757-0.876, P <0.001). The cut-off value of the wrist measurement for detecting a tympanic temperature of ≥37.3 °C was 36.2 °C, with 86.4% sensitivity and 67.0% specificity, and the best threshold for the forehead measurement was 36.2 °C, with 93.2% sensitivity and 60.0% specificity. Conclusion: Wrist measurements are more stable than forehead measurements under different circumstances. Both measurements have favorable fever screening abilities in indoor patients. The cut-off values were both 36.2 °C.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.02.20030148: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: The study was approved by Ningbo First Hospital Ethics Committee.
Consent: They gave their oral informed consent in this study.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Statistical analysis: Power calculation was performed for sample size. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:There were several limitations. First, it is …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.02.20030148: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement IRB: The study was approved by Ningbo First Hospital Ethics Committee.
Consent: They gave their oral informed consent in this study.Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Statistical analysis: Power calculation was performed for sample size. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:There were several limitations. First, it is difficult to quantify the physiological and environmental conditions. Second, only one brand of thermometer was enrolled in this study. It was uncertain that it could be generalized to all brands of thermometers in the market. In conclusion, this study confirmed wrist measurement was more stable for participants under different circumstance than forehead measurement. Both measurement had significantly great fever screening abilities for indoor patients, and the cut-off value of both measurements for fever was 36.2°C. Further studies are needed to explore the validity and accuracy of wrist temperature.
Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:
Identifier Status Title NCT04274621 Completed The Application Value of Non-contact Infrared Thermometers i… Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.02.20030148: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement The study was approved by Ningbo First Hospital Ethics Committee. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Statistical analysis Power calculation was performed for sample size. Sex as a biological variable 69.4% (n = 297) of participants were males, and 78.2% (n = 413) were patients (Table 1). Table 2: Resources
Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.
About SciScore
SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.03.02.20030148: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement The study was approved by Ningbo First Hospital Ethics Committee. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis Statistical analysis Power calculation was performed for sample size. Sex as a biological variable 69.4% (n = 297) of participants were males, and 78.2% (n = 413) were patients (Table 1). Table 2: Resources
Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your data.
About SciScore
SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore is not a substitute for expert review. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers) in the manuscript, and detects sentences that appear to be missing RRIDs. SciScore also checks to make sure that rigor criteria are addressed by authors. It does this by detecting sentences that discuss criteria such as blinding or power analysis. SciScore does not guarantee that the rigor criteria that it detects are appropriate for the particular study. Instead it assists authors, editors, and reviewers by drawing attention to sections of the manuscript that contain or should contain various rigor criteria and key resources. For details on the results shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.
-
