ArticleFrontiers in physiology2017
The Systematic Bias of Ingestible Core Temperature Sensors Requires a Correction by Linear Regression.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Limited benefit of repeated post-exercise hot water immersion on exercise performance of well-trained cyclists in warm and hot conditions.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- A Comprehensive Review of Non-Invasive Core Body Temperature Measurement Techniques.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The effect of acute hot water immersion on cutaneous peripheral microvascular responses in males of White-European, Black-African and South-Asian descent.Temperature (Austin, Tex.) · 2025Article
- Hot water immersion acutely reduces peripheral glucose uptake in young healthy males: An exploratory crossover randomized controlled trial.Temperature (Austin, Tex.) · 2023Article
- Article
- Smart Patch for Skin Temperature: Preliminary Study to Evaluate Psychometrics and Feasibility.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- The Effects of Heat Exposure During Intermittent Exercise on Physical and Cognitive Performance Among Team Sport Athletes.Perceptual and motor skills · 2021Article
- Independent or simultaneous lowering of core and skin temperature has no impact on self-paced intermittent running performance in hot conditions.European journal of applied physiology · 2019Article
- Validity of a noninvasive estimation of deep body temperature when wearing personal protective equipment during exercise and recovery.Military Medical Research · 2019Article
- An Overt Chemical Protective Garment Reduces Thermal Strain Compared with a Covert Garment in Warm-Wet but Not Hot-Dry Environments.Frontiers in physiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An accurate measure of core body temperature is critical for monitoring individuals, groups and teams undertaking physical activity in situations of high heat stress or prolonged cold exposure. This study examined the range in systematic bias of ingestible temperature sensors compared to a certified and traceable reference thermometer. A total of 119 ingestible temperature sensors were immersed in a circulated water bath at five water temperatures (TEMP A: 35.12 ± 0.60°C, TEMP B: 37.33 ± 0.56°C, TEMP C: 39.48 ± 0.73°C, TEMP D: 41.58 ± 0.97°C, and TEMP E: 43.47 ± 1.07°C) along with a certified traceable reference thermometer. Thirteen sensors (10.9%) demonstrated a systematic bias > ±0.1°C, of which 4 (3.3%) were > ± 0.5°C. Limits of agreement (95%) indicated that systematic bias would likely fall in the range of -0.14 to 0.26°C, highlighting that it is possible for temperatures measured between sensors to differ by more than 0.4°C. The proportion of sensors with systematic bias > ±0.1°C (10.9%) confirms that ingestible temperature sensors require correction to ensure their accuracy. An individualized linear correction achieved a mean systematic bias of 0.00°C, and limits of agreement (95%) to 0.00-0.00°C, with 100% of sensors achieving ±0.1°C accuracy. Alternatively, a generalized linear function (Corrected Temperature (°C) = 1.00375 × Sensor Temperature (°C) - 0.205549), produced as the average slope and intercept of a sub-set of 51 sensors and excluding sensors with accuracy outside ±0.5°C, reduced the systematic bias to < ±0.1°C in 98.4% of the remaining sensors (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.