Validity And Reliability Of The CortempTm Telemetric Pill During 50 H Of Reuse.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuous measurement of rectal temperature using a telemetric pill (TP) inserted as a suppository has been validated. However, the use of TP may remain limited because of its high cost and single use. We have determined in our laboratory that the CorTempTM TP can be used repeatedly over time; in fact, it has a large battery autonomy, can be turned on and off at will and easily survives high-level disinfection. Reuse of the TP is made possible using a technique involving inserting the TP inside a condom, attaching it to a dental floss and introducing the TP inside the rectum with an over-the-counter suppository applicator. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to examine the validity and reliability of CorTempTM TPs during repeated use in a water bath for a duration of 50 h. METHODS: Three TPs already used for less than 5 h each in a previous human study were tested in a water bath during 20 trials ranging from 1 to 5 h each, for a total of 50 h and with temperature variations ranging from 37 to 40°C. Trials were conducted in a randomized manner and temperatures of the TPs were compared to those of a wired rectal probe (YSI 401, WRP). After each trial, TPs were placed in a 2.5% glutaraldehyde solution for 20 min to achieve high-level disinfection, as recommended when a probe is used with a condom. The WRP and each TP were calibrated before the start of the experiment. Acceptable agreement between sensors was taken as a bias ≤ 0.2°C (sum of both instrument measurement errors). RESULTS: 50 h mean biases and random errors between TP 1, 2 and 3 and the WRP were of -0.09°C/±0.12°C, -0.10°C/±0.14°C and -0.12°C/±0.15°C, respectively. Mean biases and random errors at 17 h, 34 h and 50 h of reuse were of respectively -0.10°C/±0.11°C, -0.06°C/±0.11°C and -0.11°C/±0.11°C for TP 1 vs. WRP, -0.09°C/±0.13°C, -0.08°C/±0.12°C and -0.13°C/±0.16°C for TP 2 vs. WRP and -0.14°C/±0.17°C, -0.10°C/±0.13°C and -0.11°C/±0.12°C for TP 3 vs. WRP. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the CorTempTM TP can be reused up to at least 50 h while still providing valid and reliable temperature readings. Furthermore, the CorTempTM TP can undergo high-level disinfection repeatedly while maintaining full structural and functional integrity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".