↓ Skip to main content

Forehead or ear temperature measurement cannot replace rectal measurements, except for screening purposes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
5 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Forehead or ear temperature measurement cannot replace rectal measurements, except for screening purposes
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12887-018-0994-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian Backer Mogensen, Lena Wittenhoff, Gitte Fruerhøj, Stephen Hansen

Abstract

Measuring rectal temperature in children is the gold standard, but ear or forehead measures are less traumatic and faster. The quality of non-invasive devices has improved but concerns remain whether they are reliable enough to substitute rectal thermometers. The aim was to evaluate in a real-life children population whether the forehead or ear temperature measurements could be used in screening to detect fever and if the agreement with the rectal temperature for different age groups is acceptable for clinical use. Cross-sectional clinical study comparing temporal and tympanic temperatures to rectal temperature in 0-18-year-old children. The ear thermometer was a Pro 4000 Thermoscan, the temporal Exergen TAT. Rectal temperature ≥ 38.0 °C was defined as fever. Among 995 children, 39% had a fever. The ear thermometer had a significantly greater ability to detect fever than the temporal thermometer (AUC 0.972; 95% CI: 0.963-0.981 versus AUC 0.931; 95% CI: 0.915-0.947, p < 0.0001). Both devices had the lowest sensitivity in the youngest and oldest children, and only the ear thermometer reached a sensitivity above 90% in the 0.5-5-year age group. The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the 95% limits of agreement for the temporal thermometer was between - 1.2 to + 1.5 °C and for the ear thermometer between - 0.97 to + 1.07 °C. Based on a large sample of children, the temporal measurement of temperature is not currently recommendable, but with the technology used in this study the ear measurement proved useful for screening purposes, especially among children aged 6 months to 5 years. For the exact measurement of temperature, the rectal method is still recommended.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 25%
Student > Master 10 15%
Researcher 8 12%
Other 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 16%
Engineering 11 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Physics and Astronomy 2 3%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 15 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 September 2021.
All research outputs
#824,713
of 21,322,319 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#62
of 2,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,893
of 399,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,322,319 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,727 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 399,960 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them