This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

James M. Chamberlain, MD
Children's National Medical Center Washington, DC

Thomas E. Terndrup, MD
State University of New York Upstate Health Science Center Syracuse

David Alexander, MD
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (Pa)

JAMA. 1993;269(10):1250-1251.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—The article by Mackowiak et al¹ raises several interesting points regarding clinical thermometry, but their results should be interpreted with some skepticism. The authors are correct in stating that many of Wunderlich's observations are not relevant to modern clinical thermometry. Before accepting their data as the true range of normal, however, we should be sure that the instrument is indeed measuring what we wish to measure. First, the authors report that the steady-state error of the Diatek 500 thermometer (Diatek Inc, San Diego, Calif) is 0.05°C to 0.07°C. However, it appears that the authors are not using the thermometer in a steady-state mode (called "monitor" mode by the manufacturer) but instead are using the "predictive" mode, in which the thermometer predicts the temperature based on the rate of rise of the temperature of the sensor rather than the actual equilibrium temperature. We have found in vitro . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?