↓ Skip to main content

Eye and Ear Temperature Using Infrared Thermography Are Related to Rectal Temperature in Dogs at Rest or With Exercise

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Eye and Ear Temperature Using Infrared Thermography Are Related to Rectal Temperature in Dogs at Rest or With Exercise
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2016.00111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian M. Zanghi

Abstract

Rectal body temperature (BT) has been documented in exercising dogs to monitor thermoregulation, heat stress risk, and performance during physical activity. Eye (BTeye) and ear (BTear) temperature measured with infrared thermography (IRT) were compared to rectal (BTrec) temperature as the reference method and assess alternative sites to track hyperthermia, possibly to establish BTeye IRT as a passive and non-contact method. BT measures were recorded at 09:00, 11:30, 12:30, and 02:30 from Labrador Retrievers (N = 16) and Beagles (N = 16) while sedentary and with 30-min play-exercise (pre- and 0, 15, 30-min post-exercise). Total exercise locomotor activity counts were recorded to compare relative intensity of play-exercise between breeds. BTrec, BTeye, and BTear were measured within 5 min of the target time. Each BT method was analyzed by analysis of variance for main effects of breed and time. Method differences were compared using Bland-Altman plots and linear regression. Sedentary BT differed by breed for BTrec (p < 0.0001), BTear (p < 0.0001), and BTeye (p = 0.06) with Labs having on average 0.3-0.8°C higher BT compared to Beagles. Readings also declined over time for BTeye (p < 0.0001) and BTear (p < 0.0001), but not for BTrec (p = 0.63) for both breeds. Total exercise (30-min) activity counts did not differ (p = 0.53) between breeds. Time and breed interaction was significant in response to exercise for both BTrec and BTear (p = 0.035 and p = 0.005, respectively), with a marginal interaction (p = 0.09) for BTeye. All the three methods detected hyperthermia with Labs having a higher increase compared to Beagles. Both BTear and BTeye were significantly (p < 0.0001) related to BTrec in all dogs with sedentary or exercise activity. The relationship between BTeye and BTrec improved when monitoring exercise hyperthermia (r = 0.674) versus measures at rest (r = 0.381), whereas BTear was significantly related to BTrec regardless of activity (r = 0.615-0.735). Although BT readings were significantly related, method bias (p < 0.02) was observed for BTeye to slightly underestimate BTrec, whereas no bias was observed between BTear and BTrec. This study demonstrates that IRT technology effectively measures both ear and eye temperature and enables effective monitoring of BT changes at rest, with exercise, and between breeds. However, ear, and not eye, temperature is a better reflection of rectal temperature.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 20 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 26 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 24 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 22 July 2021.
All research outputs
#4,198,035
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#739
of 6,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,613
of 420,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#6
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 420,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.