Development of a source-exposure matrix for occupational EMF exposure assessment in the INTEROCC study

2016 · Unclear · Moderate evidence

← Research stream

UnclearModerate evidencePaper 1413

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2016

Study typeexposure_assessment

Reported directionUnclear

Evidence ratingModerate

Abstract

Development of a source-exposure matrix for occupational EMF exposure assessment in the INTEROCC study Vila J, Bowman JD, Figuerola J, Moriña D, Kincl L, Richardson L, Cardis E. Development of a source-exposure matrix for occupational exposure assessment of electromagnetic fields in the INTEROCC study. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2016 Nov 9. doi: 10.1038/jes.2016.60. Abstract To estimate occupational exposures to electromagnetic fields (EMF) for the INTEROCC study, a database of source-based measurements extracted from published and unpublished literature resources had been previously constructed. The aim of the current work was to summarize these measurements into a source- exposure matrix (SEM), accounting for their quality and relevance. A novel methodology for combining available measurements was developed, based on order statistics and log-normal distribution characteristics. Arithmetic and geometric means, and estimates of variability and maximum exposure were calculated by EMF source, frequency band and dosimetry type. The mean estimates were weighted by our confidence in the pooled measurements. The SEM contains confidence-weighted mean and maximum estimates for 312 EMF exposure sources (from 0 Hz to 300 GHz). Operator position geometric mean electric field levels for radiofrequency (RF) sources ranged between 0.8 V/m (plasma etcher) and 320 V/m (RF sealer), while magnetic fields ranged from 0.02 A/m (speed radar) to 0.6 A/m (microwave heating). For extremely low frequency sources, electric fields ranged between 0.2 V/m (electric forklift) and 11,700 V/m (high-voltage transmission line-hotsticks), whereas magnetic fields ranged between 0.14 μT (visual display terminals) and 17 μT (tungsten inert gas welding). The methodology developed allowed the construction of the first EMF-SEM and may be used to summarize similar exposure data for other physical or chemical agents. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov Excerpt This work allowed the construction of a SEM containing estimated exposure statistics for the most common occupational sources of EMF exposure, identified through the INTEROCC study questionnaire. This database represents a new approach for occupational exposure assessment, based on EMF sources independent of occupation. The SEM will be available online as a free-access tool at crealradiation.com. Although the current version does not include all possible EMF sources, it can be updated with new or newly identified measurements and sources.

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

ExposureELF to RF/microwave

Evidence strengthModerateConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

A methodology using order statistics and log-normal distribution characteristics was developed to pool source-based EMF measurements into a source-exposure matrix. The SEM provides confidence-weighted mean and maximum exposure estimates for 312 occupational EMF sources spanning 0 Hz to 300 GHz, with example ranges reported for RF and ELF electric and magnetic field levels across specific sources.

Outcomes measured

Development of a source-exposure matrix (SEM) for occupational EMF exposure assessment
Confidence-weighted mean and maximum exposure estimates by EMF source, frequency band, and dosimetry type

Limitations

Database constructed from published and unpublished literature resources; completeness of sources not guaranteed ("does not include all possible EMF sources")
Exposure estimates depend on measurement quality and relevance; confidence-weighting indicates variable certainty across pooled measurements

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "exposure_assessment",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "ELF to RF/microwave",
    "source": "occupational sources (source-exposure matrix)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Development of a source-exposure matrix (SEM) for occupational EMF exposure assessment",
    "Confidence-weighted mean and maximum exposure estimates by EMF source, frequency band, and dosimetry type"
  ],
  "main_findings": "A methodology using order statistics and log-normal distribution characteristics was developed to pool source-based EMF measurements into a source-exposure matrix. The SEM provides confidence-weighted mean and maximum exposure estimates for 312 occupational EMF sources spanning 0 Hz to 300 GHz, with example ranges reported for RF and ELF electric and magnetic field levels across specific sources.",
  "effect_direction": "unclear",
  "limitations": [
    "Database constructed from published and unpublished literature resources; completeness of sources not guaranteed (\"does not include all possible EMF sources\")",
    "Exposure estimates depend on measurement quality and relevance; confidence-weighting indicates variable certainty across pooled measurements"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "moderate",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "INTEROCC",
    "occupational exposure",
    "electromagnetic fields",
    "source-exposure matrix",
    "SEM",
    "exposure assessment",
    "ELF",
    "radiofrequency",
    "0 Hz to 300 GHz",
    "dosimetry",
    "electric field",
    "magnetic field"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0.95,
      "reason": "Develops an exposure assessment tool (SEM) for common occupational EMF sources used in the INTEROCC study."
    }
  ]
}

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: 10.1038/jes.2016.60
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library