TY - JOUR T1 - Quantitative definition of fever needs a change JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.06.13.21258846 SP - 2021.06.13.21258846 AU - Nitin Kumar AU - Mayank Kapoor AU - Prasan Kumar Panda AU - Yogesh Singh AU - Ajeet Singh Bhadoriya Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/06/16/2021.06.13.21258846.abstract N2 - Background The age-old definition of fever was derived using cross-sectional population surveying utilizing old techniques without considering symptomatology. However, the diagnosis of fever must be made only in the presence of associated symptoms that can distinguish it from the mere asymptomatic physiologic rise of temperature. Association of the temperature values with the symptoms to define the cut-off for fever is need of the hour.Methods A longitudinal study on the healthy population of Northen-India were followed-up over 1-year. Participants were advised for self-monitoring of oral temperature with a standard digital thermometer in either left or right sublingual pocket and record it in the thermometry diary. The study was considered complete if the participant had all the three phases of the study (i.e. non-febrile, febrile, and post-febrile phases) or completed the duration of the study.Results Per protocol analysis done for febrile participants (n=144, temperature recordings= 23851). The mean febrile phase temperature was 100.25 ± 1.440F. A temperature of 99.10F had maximum diagnostic accuracy for feeling feverish (98.2%), along with one (98.3%) or two (99%) associated symptoms. Summer and spring months showed higher temperatures (100.38 ± 1.44 v/s 99.80 ± 1.49, P<0.001), whereas no significant temperature difference could be noted amongst the gender.Conclusions A revised cut-off for the temperature to decide fever is hereby proposed: 99.10F along with one or two associated symptoms. This is going to redefine fever in the modern era completely.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNon-fundedAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Approval obtained from Institute Ethical Committee, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh (No. 235/IEC/PGM/2019)All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesIt will be available with corresponding author. ER -