Significance: Infrared thermographs (IRTs) have been used for fever screening during infectious disease epidemics, including severe acute respiratory syndrome, Ebola virus disease, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although IRTs have significant potential for human body temperature measurement, the literature indicates inconsistent diagnostic performance, possibly due to wide variations in implemented methodology. A standardized method for IRT fever screening was recently published, but there is a lack of clinical data demonstrating its impact on IRT performance. Aim: Perform a clinical study to assess the diagnostic effectiveness of standardized IRT-based fever screening and evaluate the effect of facial measurement location. Approach: We performed a clinical study of 596 subjects. Temperatures from 17 facial locations were extracted from thermal images and compared with oral thermometry. Statistical analyses included calculation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the curve (AUC) values for detection of febrile subjects. Results: Pearson correlation coefficients for IRT-based and reference (oral) temperatures were found to vary strongly with measurement location. Approaches based on maximum temperatures in either inner canthi or full-face regions indicated stronger discrimination ability than maximum forehead temperature (AUC values of 0.95 to 0.97 versus 0.86 to 0.87, respectively) and other specific facial locations. These values are markedly better than the vast majority of results found in prior human studies of IRT-based fever screening. Conclusion: Our findings provide clinical confirmation of the utility of consensus approaches for fever screening, including the use of inner canthi temperatures, while also indicating that full-face maximum temperatures may provide an effective alternate approach.

中文翻译：

---

发热筛查热成像的临床评估：共识指南和面部测量位置的影响。

启示：红外热像仪（IRT）已用于传染病流行期间的发烧筛查，包括严重的急性呼吸综合症，埃博拉病毒病和2019年的冠状病毒病（COVID-19）。尽管IRT在人体温度测量中具有巨大潜力，但文献表明诊断性能不一致，可能是由于实施方法的差异很大。最近发布了IRT发烧筛查的标准化方法，但是缺乏临床数据证明其对IRT性能的影响。目的：进行一项临床研究，以评估基于IRT的标准化发热筛查的诊断效果，并评估面部测量位置的效果。方法：我们进行了596位受试者的临床研究。从热图像中提取17个面部位置的温度，并与口腔测温法进行比较。统计分析包括计算接收者工作特征（ROC）曲线和曲线下面积（AUC）值，以检测发热对象。结果：发现基于IRT的温度和参考（口腔）温度的Pearson相关系数随测量位置而有很大变化。基于内can部或全脸区域最高温度的方法显示出比最大额头温度（AUC值分别为0.95至0.97对0.86至0.87）和其他特定面部位置更强的辨别能力。这些值明显优于以前的基于IRT的发烧筛查的人体研究发现的绝大多数结果。结论：