Suppr超能文献

评估用于测量奶牛犊牛体温的红外热成像相机。

Evaluation of an infrared thermography camera for measuring body temperature in dairy calves.

作者信息

Cantor M C, Goetz H M, Beattie K, Renaud D L

机构信息

Department of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1G 2W1.

出版信息

JDS Commun. 2022 Jul 9;3(5):357-361. doi: 10.3168/jdsc.2022-0227. eCollection 2022 Sep.

Abstract

The objective of this diagnostic accuracy study was to validate an infrared thermography (IRT) camera and its software (FLIR One, FLIR, Global) for accuracy and precision for ocular temperature readings to serve as a proxy for rectal temperature in commercially housed calves. A total of 318 male Holstein calves were enrolled into this study from the day of arrival to a calf rearing facility until 14 d later. Researchers took an ocular temperature reading using an IRT camera, and a rectal temperature on each calf each day in the morning. The reference standard method for body temperature in the calves was rectal temperature. We assessed the data for agreement between the IRT and the reference standard using Pearson correlations by calf (accuracy), coefficients of determination (precision), and Bland-Altman plots for bias. In addition, a logistic regression model was built using the reference method as the outcome, with IRT as an explanatory variable to assess the diagnostic accuracy of IRT as an indicator of fever (rectal temperature ≥39.5°C). There was a negligible correlation between the IRT readings and rectal temperature (r = 0.22) and the coefficient of determination for IRT to predict rectal temperature was negligible (R = 0.05), suggesting poor precision. The average mean difference between the IRT data and rectal temperature was 0.55°C, and the differences between IRT and rectal formed a linear line around the mean difference, suggesting the Bland-Altman analyses showed proportional error and bias. The optimal probability cut-off for IRT readings for fever was at 39.5°C, and had a receiver operating characteristic area under the curve of 0.67, a sensitivity of 61%, a specificity of 71%, and 78% (3,134/4,427) of the samples were correctly labeled as either having a fever or not using IRT readings. In summary, the IRT camera and software were not validated for serving as a proxy for rectal temperature in commercially housed calves due to poor precision, and proportional error partially explained by ambient environmental conditions. We suggest that this infrared thermography system should not replace rectal temperature readings for use in commercially housed calves.

摘要

这项诊断准确性研究的目的是验证一款红外热成像(IRT)相机及其软件(FLIR One,FLIR,全球)用于测量犊牛眼部温度的准确性和精确性,以作为商业饲养犊牛直肠温度的替代指标。共有318头雄性荷斯坦犊牛从抵达犊牛饲养设施之日起被纳入本研究,直至14天后。研究人员每天上午使用IRT相机测量每头犊牛的眼部温度,并测量其直肠温度。犊牛体温的参考标准方法是直肠温度。我们通过犊牛的Pearson相关性(准确性)、决定系数(精确性)以及Bland-Altman偏差图来评估IRT与参考标准之间的数据一致性。此外,构建了一个以参考方法为结果的逻辑回归模型,以IRT作为解释变量,评估IRT作为发热指标(直肠温度≥39.5°C)的诊断准确性。IRT读数与直肠温度之间的相关性可忽略不计(r = 0.22),IRT预测直肠温度的决定系数也可忽略不计(R = 0.05),表明精确性较差。IRT数据与直肠温度之间的平均差异为0.55°C,IRT与直肠温度之间的差异围绕平均差异形成一条直线,表明Bland-Altman分析显示存在比例误差和偏差。IRT读数用于发热的最佳概率截断值为39.5°C,曲线下面积为0.67,灵敏度为61%,特异性为71%,并且78%(3,134/4,427)的样本使用IRT读数被正确标记为发热或未发热。总之,由于精确性较差,且环境条件部分解释了比例误差,IRT相机和软件未经验证可作为商业饲养犊牛直肠温度的替代指标。我们建议,这种红外热成像系统不应取代直肠温度测量用于商业饲养的犊牛。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7047/9623779/9c86f02a984f/fx1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验