MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Infrared Ear Thermometers Do Not Accurately Measure Core Temperature in Fire Fighters During Recovery

2007· article· en· W2097762107 on OpenAlexaff
J. Mikhail Kellawan

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfrared Thermography in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCore temperatureInfrared thermometerFire fighterThermometerEnvironmental scienceCore (optical fiber)FirefightingCrewRectal temperatureMedicineAeronauticsInfraredEngineeringPhysicsAnesthesiaTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fire fighters must work maximally in many different environmental conditions (i.e. extreme heat) and, because of their protective gear, are at greater risk for thermal illness and injury than most occupations. Rehabilitation tents at fire and rescue sites allow ambulance personnel to monitor fire fighter vital signs to ensure that it is safe for the fire fighters to continue work. Many fire departments rely on infrared ear thermometers to indicate core body temperature however the accuracy of this instrument in these settings has not been determined. PURPOSE: To compare infrared ear thermometers (Te) to intra-abdominal thermometers (Tc) as a valid assessment of core body temperature in fire fighters following emergency training scenarios in different ambient temperatures. METHODS: 45 Firefighters from the Victoria Fire Department volunteered for the study. Te was measured using an infrared ear thermometer and Tc was measured using an ingested telemetry pill and data monitoring system. The subjects participated in live fire and auto extrication scenarios at three different times of the year, during cold (C) at0 & −1oC, mild (M) 8oC, and Warm (W) 27&33oC temperatures. After completion of a scenario all subjects removed their protective gear and passively cooled in an upright seated position. After the live fire scenarios, Tc and Te measurements were taken immediately after removal of gear, and after 5 and 10 minutes of recovery. In the auto extrication scenarios, Tc and Te were sampled immediately, and after 15, 30, and 45 minutes of recovery. RESULTS: In all scenarios, Te underestimated Tc regardless of recovery time interval or ambient temperature. During recovery from live fire in condition C, Te underestimated Tc by 0.46-1.44 oC (p<0.05). In M condition Te underestimated Tc by 0.7-1.83 oC (p<0.01) and in the W condition Te underestimated Tc by 0.42-1.08 oC (p<0.01). During the auto extrication trials Te underestimated Tc by a range of 0.8-1.22 oC (p<0.01) except at the 30 min. mark of recovery. The biggest discrepancy between Te and Tc were observed during the 5–15 min time periods of recovery during all trials. CONCLUSION: Infrared Ear thermometers are not an accurate predictor of core body temperature at any time up to 45 minutes following firefighter related work in any temperature.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicInfrared Thermography in MedicineFrench-language works237,207