MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120687892 · doi:10.2196/19210

An Innovative Wearable Device For Monitoring Continuous Body Surface Temperature (HEARThermo): Instrument Validation Study

2021· article· en· W3120687892 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chun‐Yin Yeh, Yi‐Ting Chung, Kun-Ta Chuang, Yu‐Chen Shu, Hung‐Yu Kao, Po‐Lin Chen, Wen‐Chien Ko, Nai‐Ying Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraclass correlationInfrared thermometerWearable computerReliability (semiconductor)ThermometerValidityLinear regressionCriterion validityLimits of agreementMedicineReproducibilitySimulationStatisticsComputer scienceConstruct validityPsychometricsMathematicsNuclear medicineInfrared

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Variations in body temperature are highly informative during an illness. To date, there are not many adequate studies that have investigated the feasibility of a wearable wrist device for the continuous monitoring of body surface temperatures in humans. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to validate the performance of HEARThermo, an innovative wearable device, which was developed to continuously monitor the body surface temperature in humans. METHODS: We implemented a multi-method research design in this study, which included 2 validation studies-one in the laboratory and one with human subjects. In validation study I, we evaluated the test-retest reliability of HEARThermo in the laboratory to measure the temperature and to correct the values recorded by each HEARThermo by using linear regression models. We conducted validation study II on human subjects who wore HEARThermo for the measurement of their body surface temperatures. Additionally, we compared the HEARThermo temperature recordings with those recorded by the infrared skin thermometer simultaneously. We used intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots to analyze the criterion validity and agreement between the 2 measurement tools. RESULTS: A total of 66 participants (age range, 10-77 years) were recruited, and 152,881 completed data were analyzed in this study. The 2 validation studies in the laboratory and on human skin indicated that HEARThermo showed a good test-retest reliability (ICC 0.96-0.98) and adequate criterion validity with the infrared skin thermometer at room temperatures of 20°C-27.9°C (ICC 0.72, P<.001). The corrected measurement bias averaged -0.02°C, which was calibrated using a water bath ranging in temperature from 16°C to 40°C. The values of each HEARThermo improved by the regression models were not significantly different from the temperature of the water bath (P=.19). Bland-Altman plots showed no visualized systematic bias. HEARThermo had a bias of 1.51°C with a 95% limit of agreement between -1.34°C and 4.35°C. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study show the validation of HEARThermo for the continuous monitoring of body surface temperatures in humans.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.354 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207