ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2025
What is the minimum time interval for reporting of intraoperative core body temperature measurements in pediatric anesthesia? A secondary analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Given that perioperative normothermia represents a quality parameter in pediatric anesthesia, numerous studies have been conducted on temperature measurement, albeit with heterogeneous measurement intervals, ranging from 30 s to fifteen minutes. We aimed to determine the minimum time interval for reporting of intraoperative core body temperature across commonly used measurement intervals in children. Data were extracted from the records of 65 children who had participated in another clinical study and analyzed using a quasibinomial mixed linear model. Documented artifacts, like probe dislocations or at the end of anesthesia, were removed. Primary outcome was the respective probability of failing to detect a temperature change of 0.2 °C or more at any one measurement point at 30 s, one minute, two minutes, five minutes, ten minutes, and fifteen minutes, considering an expected probability of less than 5% to be acceptable. Secondary outcomes included the probabilities of failing to detect hypothermia (< 36.0 °C) and hyperthermia (> 38.0 °C). Following the removal of 4,909 exclusions, the remaining 222,366 timestamped measurements (representing just over 60 h of monitoring) were analyzed. The median measurement time was 45 min. The expected probabilities of failing to detect a temperature change of 0.2 °C or more were 0.2% [95%-CI 0.0-0.7], 0.5% [95%-CI 0.0-1.2], 1.5% [95%-CI 0.2-2.6], 4.8% [95%-CI 2.7-6.9], 22.4% [95%-CI 18.3-26.4], and 31.9% [95%-CI 27.3-36.4], respectively. Probabilities for the detection of hyperthermia (n = 9) were lower and omitted for hypothermia due to low prevalence (n = 1). In conclusion, the core body temperature should be reported at intervals of no more than five minutes to ensure the detection of any temperature change in normothermic ranges. Further studies should focus on hypothermic and hyperthermic ranges.
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.