ArticleNPJ digital medicine2023
Engaging a national-scale cohort of smart thermometer users in participatory surveillance.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Overcoming biases of individual level shopping history data in health research.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Participatory surveillance systems crowdsource individual reports to rapidly assess population health phenomena. The value of these systems increases when more people join and persistently contribute. We examine the level of and factors associated with engagement in participatory surveillance among a retrospective, national-scale cohort of individuals using smartphone-connected thermometers with a companion app that allows them to report demographic and symptom information. Between January 1, 2020 and October 29, 2022, 1,325,845 participants took 20,617,435 temperature readings, yielding 3,529,377 episodes of consecutive readings. There were 1,735,805 (49.2%) episodes with self-reported symptoms (including reports of no symptoms). Compared to before the pandemic, participants were more likely to report their symptoms during pandemic waves, especially after the winter wave began (September 13, 2020) (OR across pandemic periods range from 3.0 to 4.0). Further, symptoms were more likely to be reported during febrile episodes (OR = 2.6, 95% CI = 2.6-2.6), and for new participants, during their first episode (OR = 2.4, 95% CI = 2.4-2.5). Compared with participants aged 50-65 years old, participants over 65 years were less likely to report their symptoms (OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.3-0.3). Participants in a household with both adults and children (OR = 1.6 [1.6-1.7]) were more likely to report symptoms. We find that the use of smart thermometers with companion apps facilitates the collection of data on a large, national scale, and provides real time insight into transmissible disease phenomena. Nearly half of individuals using these devices are willing to report their symptoms after taking their temperature, although participation varies among individuals and over pandemic stages.
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.