Principles and test methods of non-contact body thermometry
Beall, E. B.; Askegaard, L.; Berkesch, J.; Adolph, A. C.; Hinnerichs, C. M.; Schmidt, M. F.
Show abstract
SignificanceFar infrared (IR) has a long history in thermometry and febrile screening. Concerns have been raised recently over the accuracy of non-contact body thermometry. Clinical testing with febrile individuals constitutes the standard performance assessment. This is challenging to replicate, which may have inadvertently allowed approval of IR systems that are unable to detect fevers. The ability to test performance without relying on febrile participants would have ramifications for public health, especially if this discovered undisclosed differences in accuracy in widely used devices. AimTo identify foundational issues in, demonstrate principles of, and develop test methods for non-contact body thermometry. ApproachWe review foundational literature and identify confounds impeding performance of IR thermography (IRT) and non-contact IR thermometry (NCIT) for febrile screening and demonstrate corrections for their effects, which would otherwise be unacceptable. Almost none of the devices we are aware of compensate for these confounds. We reverse-engineer surface-to-body temperature relations for several FDA-cleared NCITs. We note their similarity to recently reported bias-to-normal behavior in other devices and determine range of body temperatures for which the device would produce a "normal" (non-febrile) output. Finally, we generate predictable elevated face temperatures in healthy subjects and demonstrate this in several devices. ResultsThe surface-to-body relationships for two IRT and one NCIT were linear, while all others exhibited nonlinear bias-to-normal behavior that produce normal temperatures when presented with surface temperatures ranging from hypothermia to moderate-to-severe fever. The test method was used in healthy, non-febrile subjects to generate elevated temperatures corresponding to body temperatures from 97.35F to 102.45F. Three out of five systems had negligible sensitivity. ConclusionsThis demonstrates an alternative evaluation method without the limitations and risks of febrile patients. These results indicate many devices may be unusable for body thermometry and may be providing a false sense of security for public health surveillance.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of at-home methods for N95 filtering facepiece respirator decontamination 92%
- Spatiotemporal droplet dispersion measurements demonstrate face masks reduce risks from singing: results from the COvid aNd FacEmaSkS Study (CONFESS) 92%
- A low power flexible dielectric barrier discharge disinfects surfaces and improves the action of hydrogen peroxide 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Minimizing exposure to respiratory droplets, ‘jet riders’ and aerosols in air-conditioned hospital rooms by a ‘Shield-and-Sink’ strategy 90%
- HEART rate variability biofeedback for LOng Covid symptoms (HEARTLOC): protocol for a feasibility study 89%
- Ventilation and detection of airborne SARS-CoV-2: elucidating high-risk spaces in naturally ventilated healthcare settings 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Mobilefuge: A low-cost, portable, open source, 3D-printed centrifuge that can be used for purification of saliva samples for SARS-CoV2 detection 93%
- Improving Hand Hygiene In Cruise Ship: An Intervention Study 91%
- Physiologically relevant real-world light exposure and its behavioural and environmental determinants in Kumasi, Ghana 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Passive Microwave Radiometry (MWR) for diagnostics of COVID-19 lung complications in Kyrgyzstan 92%
- Commercially-available heart rate monitor repurposed into a 9-gram standalone device for automatic arrhythmia detection with snapshot electrocardiographic capability: a pilot validation 91%
- Reducing the Cost of Rapid Antigen Tests through Swab Pooling and Extraction in a Device 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.