Normative Temperature, Demographic Categories, and the Limits of Infrared Thermometry
- 1Yale University
Abstract
ObjectiveTemperature readings are routinely stratified by race and ethnicity, though significant group differences may reflect physiology, instrument noise, or categorization rather than biology. This study tests whether these categories partition facial infrared thermography measurements beyond individual variation and baseline device noise.
ApproachA secondary analysis of thermography data (n = 951 adults) compares inner-canthus maximum (TCEmax) and full-face maximum (Tmax) temperatures across five administrative categories via one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), mixed-effects modeling, Bland-Altman analysis against oral reference, and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis.
Main resultsANOVA returns significant group differences (p < 0.001; 2 = 0.04 for TCEmax, 0.03 for Tmax), but the total spread (0.2 {degrees}C to 0.3 {degrees}C) is comparable to device accuracy and within-subject variability. Individual variation accounts for 95% of TCEmax variance, and adding simulated Gaussian noise to participant-level temperatures ({sigma} = 0.10- 0.30 {degrees}C) preserves the complete group-mean rank order in as few as 37.5% of iterations.
SignificanceTesting whether a group difference survives perturbation at the scale of instrument accuracy offers a check against treating significance alone as evidence of physiology. Here, observed group differences are small relative to measurement variability, and their physiological interpretation remains uncertain, with implications for clinical tools that treat administrative categories as biologically meaningful.
Related
- From population equality to demographic alignment: normative benchmarks and institutional governance of health workforce allocation in China, 2012–2024
- Comparison of a wearable core temperature sensor with rectal thermometry during high-intensity interval running in pregnant and non-pregnant women.
- Sex-Related Differences in Skin Temperature Responses Induced by Small-Sided Games Assessed Using Infrared Thermography.
- Serial Static Infrared Thermography for Intraoperative and Postoperative Surface-Temperature Monitoring of Free-Flap Skin Islands in Paediatric Craniofacial Reconstruction: A Technical Feasibility Study
- Does Skin-Surface Temperature Reflect Recovery After Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Prospective Pilot Study with Infrared Thermographic Analysis
BibTeX
@misc{lohier2026normative,
title = {{Normative Temperature, Demographic Categories, and the Limits of Infrared Thermometry}},
author = {A. Lohier and A. G. Campbell and D. Chartash},
howpublished = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.64898/2026.10.19.26365925},
url = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.10.19.26365925v1},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Normative Temperature, Demographic Categories, and the Limits of Infrared Thermometry
AU - A. Lohier
AU - A. G. Campbell
AU - D. Chartash
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/19
PB - medRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.10.19.26365925
UR - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.10.19.26365925v1
AB - ObjectiveTemperature readings are routinely stratified by race and ethnicity, though significant group differences may reflect physiology, instrument noise, or categorization rather than biology. This study tests whether these categories partition facial infrared thermography measurements beyond individual variation and baseline device noise. ApproachA secondary analysis of thermography data (n = 951 adults) compares inner-canthus maximum (TCEmax) and full-face maximum (Tmax) temperatures across five administrative categories via one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), mixed-effects modeling, Bland-Altman analysis against oral reference, and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis. Main resultsANOVA returns significant group differences (p < 0.001; 2 = 0.04 for TCEmax, 0.03 for Tmax), but the total spread (0.2 {degrees}C to 0.3 {degrees}C) is comparable to device accuracy and within-subject variability. Individual variation accounts for 95% of TCEmax variance, and adding simulated Gaussian noise to participant-level temperatures ({sigma} = 0.10- 0.30 {degrees}C) preserves the complete group-mean rank order in as few as 37.5% of iterations. SignificanceTesting whether a group difference survives perturbation at the scale of instrument accuracy offers a check against treating significance alone as evidence of physiology. Here, observed group differences are small relative to measurement variability, and their physiological interpretation remains uncertain, with implications for clinical tools that treat administrative categories as biologically meaningful.
ER -