Smartphone-Based Methodology Applied to Electromagnetic Field Exposure Assessment

Sensors (Basel) · 2024 · Unclear · Low evidence

← Research stream

UnclearLow evidencePaper 123

Study snapshot

PublicationSensors (Basel) · 2024

Study typeexposure_assessment

Reported directionUnclear

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Smartphone-Based Methodology Applied to Electromagnetic Field Exposure Assessment López-Espí PL, Sánchez-Montero R, Guillén-Pina J, Castro-Sanz R, Chocano-Del-Cerro R, Martínez-Rojas JA. Smartphone-Based Methodology Applied to Electromagnetic Field Exposure Assessment. Sensors (Basel). 2024 May 31;24(11):3561. doi: 10.3390/s24113561. Abstract This study presents the measurements of exposure to electromagnetic fields, carried out comparatively following standard methods from fixed sites using a broadband meter and using a smartphone on which an App designed for this purpose has been installed. The results of two measurement campaigns carried out on the campus of the University of Alcalá over an area of 1.9 km2 are presented. To characterize the exposure, 20 fixed points were measured in the first case and 860 points along the route made with a bicycle in the last case. The results obtained indicate that there is proportionality between the two methods, making it possible to use the smartphone for comparative measurements. The presented methodology makes it possible to characterize the exposure in the area under study in four times less time than that required with the traditional methodology Open access paper: mdpi.com

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeexposure_assessment

Effect directionunclear

PopulationNot supplied

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureNot supplied

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Two measurement campaigns on the University of Alcalá campus compared standard fixed-site broadband meter measurements with smartphone app-based measurements. The results indicated proportionality between the two methods, suggesting the smartphone can be used for comparative measurements, and the smartphone-based methodology characterized exposure in about four times less time than the traditional approach.

Outcomes measured

Environmental electromagnetic field exposure measurements
Agreement/proportionality between fixed-site broadband meter measurements and smartphone app-based measurements
Measurement efficiency (time required) for exposure characterization

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "exposure_assessment",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": null,
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Environmental electromagnetic field exposure measurements",
    "Agreement/proportionality between fixed-site broadband meter measurements and smartphone app-based measurements",
    "Measurement efficiency (time required) for exposure characterization"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Two measurement campaigns on the University of Alcalá campus compared standard fixed-site broadband meter measurements with smartphone app-based measurements. The results indicated proportionality between the two methods, suggesting the smartphone can be used for comparative measurements, and the smartphone-based methodology characterized exposure in about four times less time than the traditional approach.",
  "effect_direction": "unclear",
  "limitations": [],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "electromagnetic field exposure",
    "exposure assessment",
    "smartphone app",
    "broadband meter",
    "measurement campaign",
    "fixed-site measurements",
    "mobile measurements",
    "campus",
    "University of Alcalá"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.3390/s24113561
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library