ArticleInternational journal of biometeorology2021
Comparison of body temperature in donkeys using rectal digital, infrared, and mercury-in-glass thermometers during the hot-dry season in a tropical savannah.
Article in International journal of biometeorology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of packing on the diurnal rhythms of respiratory and heart rates in donkeys during the hot-dry season.Journal of equine science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study aimed at comparing variations in body temperature values recorded using rectal digital, infrared, and mercury-in-glass thermometers in donkeys during the hot-dry season, prevailing under tropical savannah conditions. Thirty donkeys that served as subjects were divided into three groups of adults, yearlings, and foals. Values of the body temperature of each donkey were recorded bihourly, starting from 06:00 h till 18:00 h, by digital (5-cm depth of insertion), mercury-in-glass (3 cm depth), and infrared thermometers. The values obtained by each type of the thermometer were compared with those recorded using a 15-cm digital probe (Model HI935007, Hanna Instruments, range -50.0 to 150.0°C; accuracy ± 0.2°C) which served as the gold standard. Dry-bulb temperature (34.00 ± 0.50°C), temperature-humidity index (79.65 ± 0.15), and wet-bulb globe temperature (28.00 ± 0.50) index peaked at 14:00 h. The mean body temperatures for rectal probe, digital, mercury-in-glass, and infrared thermometers were 38.35 ± 0.11°C, 37.24 ± 0.04°C, 36.76 ± 0.06°C, and 36.92 ± 0.07°C, respectively. In comparison to the rectal probe, the mean bias for digital (-1.11 ± 0.05°C), mercury-in-glass (-1.59 ± 0.07°C), and infrared thermometers (-1.38 ± 0.07°C) was large. The Passing-Bablok regression plot demonstrated significant deviation from linearity (p < 0.01) when digital, infrared, and mercury-in-glass thermometers were compared to the rectal probe. The area under the curve (AUC) for digital (AUC: 0.7005 ± 0.01 [95%: 0.6853 - 0.7310], infrared (AUC: 0.6711 ± 0.01 [95%: 0.6322 - 0.7100], and mercury-in-glass (AUC: 0.6321 ± 0.01 [95%: 0.6001 - 0.7873] thermometers showed poor accuracy with low sensitivity. In conclusion, the use of digital, mercury-in-glass, and infrared thermometers in recording body temperature in donkeys during the hot-dry season underestimated the values. Their use in measuring body temperature may result in wrong diagnosis, and compromise the control of hyperthermia and diseases associated with thermoregulatory impairments in donkeys.
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.