Cited by 19COVID-19 epidemiological studiesSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing

Feasibility and effectiveness of daily temperature screening to detect COVID-19 in a prospective cohort at a large public university

Open access
Facente, Shelley N., Hunter, Lauren A., Packel, Laura J., Li, Yi, Harte, Anna, Nicolette, Guy, McDevitt, Shana, Petersen, Maya +1 more·2021·BMC Public Health

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many persons with active SARS-CoV-2 infection experience mild or no symptoms, presenting barriers to COVID-19 prevention. Regular temperature screening is nonetheless used in some settings, including university campuses, to reduce transmission potential. We evaluated the potential impact of this strategy using a prospective university-affiliated cohort. METHODS: Between June and August 2020, 2912 participants were enrolled and tested for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR at least once (median: 3, range: 1-9). Participants reported temperature and symptoms daily via electronic survey using a previously owned or study-provided thermometer. We assessed feasibility and acceptability of daily temperature monitoring, calculated sensitivity and specificity of various fever-based strategies for restricting campus access to reduce transmission, and estimated the association between measured temperature and SARS-CoV-2 test positivity using a longitudinal binomial mixed model. RESULTS: Most participants (70.2%) did not initially have a thermometer for taking their temperature daily. Across 5481 total person months, the average daily completion rate of temperature values was 61.6% (median: 67.6%, IQR: 41.8-86.2%). Sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 ranged from 0% (95% CI 0-9.7%) to 40.5% (95% CI 25.6-56.7%) across all strategies for self-report of possible COVID-19 symptoms on day of specimen collection, with corresponding specificity of 99.9% (95% CI 99.8-100%) to 95.3% (95% CI 94.7-95.9%). An increase of 0.1 °F in individual mean body temperature on the same day as specimen collection was associated with 1.11 increased odds of SARS-CoV-2 positivity (95% CI 1.06-1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first, to our knowledge, that examines the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of daily temperature screening in a prospective cohort during an infectious disease outbreak, and the only study to assess these strategies in a university population. Daily temperature monitoring was feasible and acceptable; however, the majority of potentially infectious individuals were not detected by temperature monitoring, suggesting that temperature screening is insufficient as a primary means of detection to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12889-021-11697-6

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Continuous measurement of core body temperature can determine the stage of an ongoing disease.

    “Another use of continuous measurement of the patient’s core body temperature is to determine the stage of the ongoing disease [155,156].”

    From The Current State of Optical Sensors in Medical Wearables (2022) · cites this paper as [156]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [9]Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Mass Thermography Screening for Infection and Prevention: A Review of the Clinical Effectiveness. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2014. 25520988

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Facente, S. N., Hunter, L. A., Packel, L. J., Li, Y., Harte, A., Nicolette, G., McDevitt, S., Petersen, M., & Reingold, A. L.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Innovative Genomics Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Facente, Shelley N.
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2021-09-16
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
1693-1693
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3200917370
Cited by
19
References
41
Citations by year
2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 3
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Innovative Genomics Institute
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2, temperature screening, asymptomatic transmission, university campus, screening feasibility, screening sensitivity and specificity, body temperature, COVID-19 prevention
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Feasibility Studies, Humans, Prospective Studies, Temperature, Universities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review