Objective We compared an infrared temporal artery thermometer with our clinical standard axillary thermometer for temperature measurements in neonatal patients. Study Design We measured temporal artery (Tta), axillary (Tax, clinical standard), and rectal (Tr, gold standard) temperatures of 49 infants. The difference between Tr and Tta was compared with that between Tr and Tax, and the data were analyzed based on bed type and postmenstrual age. Results The mean Tta, Tax, and Tr were 37.16 (SD 0.36) °C, 36.61 (SD 0.30) °C, and 36.82 (SD 0.30) °C, respectively. The measurements by these methods were all significantly different. The mean Tr-Tax was 0.21 (SD 0.26) °C, and the mean Tr-Tta was -0.34 (SD 0.37) °C, indicating that Tax was closer to Tr than was Tta (p < 0.0001). Tta agreed more closely with Tr for infants in cribs than for those in incubators. Adjusting for bed type and body weight, with each week of postmenstrual age, the discrepancy between Tr-Tta and Tr-Tax decreased by 0.005°C (p = 0.034). Conclusion Compared with the gold standard, Tr, Tta is not more accurate than Tax. The temporal artery thermometer was less accurate for infants in incubators than for infants in cribs. The accuracy of temporal artery temperature increased with postmenstrual age.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 19 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,212,182
of 27,412,402 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Perinatology
#772
of 2,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,440
of 331,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Perinatology
#12
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,412,402 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,945 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 331,192 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
