ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Clinical Accuracy of Non-Contact Forehead Infrared Thermometer Measurement in Children: An Observational Study.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of age on comparative diagnostic accuracy of temporal artery thermometers and non-contact infrared thermometers for fever detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Non-Contact Infrared Thermometers and Thermal Scanners for Human Body Temperature Monitoring: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Cross-sectional analysis of site- and ambient temperature-related variability in noncontact infrared thermometry among healthy Black African adults.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Three Methods of Body Temperature Measurement in Children: A Latent Class Approach.Cureus · 2025Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Calibrated and Non-calibrated Infrared Thermometer Versus Calibrated Digital Thermometer in Healthy Volunteers and Febrile Patients in a Tertiary Care Center in Central India.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the clinical reliability and utility of temperature measurements using no-contact forehead infrared thermometers (NCFITs) by comparing their temperature measurements with those obtained using infrared tympanic thermometers (IRTTs) in children. In this observational, prospective, and cross-sectional study, we enrolled 255 children (aged 1 month to 18 years) from the pediatric surgery ward at a tertiary medical center in Korea. The mean age of the children was 9.05 ± 5.39 years, and 54.9% were boys. The incidence rate of fever, defined as an IRTT reading of ≥38.0 °C, was 15.7%. The ICC coefficient for the assessment of agreement between temperatures recorded by the NCFIT and IRTT was 0.87, and the κ-coefficient was 0.83. The bias and 95% limits of agreement were 0.15 °C (−0.43 to 0.73). For an accurate diagnosis of fever (≥38 °C), the false-negative rate was much lower, but the false-positive rate was higher, especially in 6-year-old children. Therefore, NCFITs can be used to screen children for fever. However, a secondary check is required using another thermometer when the child’s temperature is >38 °C. NCFITs are proposed for screening but not for measuring the temperature. For the latter, an accurate and reliable thermometer shall be used.
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.