RF Safe

Association of personal exposure to power-frequency magnetic fields with pregnancy outcomes among women seeking fertility treatment in a longitudinal cohort study

Fertility and sterility · 2020 · No effect · Low evidence

← Research stream
No effectLow evidencePaper 1932

In crude and adjusted models, no statistically significant associations were observed between personal power-frequency magnetic field exposure metrics and fertility treatment or pregnancy outcomes. Effect estimates varied in direction depending on outcome and…

Study snapshot

PublicationFertility and sterility · 2020
Study typecohort
Reported directionNo effect
Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Association of personal exposure to power-frequency magnetic fields with pregnancy outcomes among women seeking fertility treatment in a longitudinal cohort study Mary E Ingle, Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón, Ryan C Lewis, Paige L Williams, Jennifer B Ford, Ramace Dadd, Russ Hauser, John D Meeker, EARTH Study Team. Association of personal exposure to power-frequency magnetic fields with pregnancy outcomes among women seeking fertility treatment in a longitudinal cohort study. Fertil Steril. 2020 Oct 6;S0015-0282(20)30535-5. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.05.044. Abstract Objective: To assess for the first time the potential relationships of personal exposure to magnetic fields (MF) with pregnancy outcomes among a cohort of women from a fertility clinic, addressing, through study design, some of the primary limitations of previous studies on this topic. Design: Longitudinal preconception prospective cohort. Setting: Fertility center. Patient(s): Our analysis included 119 women recruited from 2012 to 2018, who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) (n = 163 cycles) and/or intrauterine insemination (IUI) (n = 123 cycles). Intervention(s): Women wore personal exposure monitors continuously for up to three consecutive 24-hour time periods separated by several weeks. Main outcome measure(s): Implantation, clinical pregnancy, live birth, and pregnancy loss. Result(s): The median and maximum of the overall daily mean (daily peak) MF exposure levels were 1.10 mG (2.14 mG) and 15.54 mG (58.73 mG), respectively. MF exposure metrics were highest among women who changed environments four or more times per day. Overall, no statistically significant associations between MF exposure metrics and fertility treatment or pregnancy outcomes were observed in crude or adjusted models. Effect estimates, both positive and negative, varied by outcome and the exposure metric, including the way in which exposure was modeled. Conclusion(s): Personal MF exposures were not associated with fertility treatment outcomes or pregnancy outcomes. Despite its limited size, strengths of the study include a longitudinal repeated-measures design, the collection of personal MF exposure data across multiple days, and carefully documented outcome and covariate information among a potentially susceptible study population. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

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 typecohort
Effect directionno_effect
PopulationWomen seeking fertility treatment at a fertility center (IVF and/or IUI)
Sample size119
ExposureELF · continuous monitoring for up to three consecutive 24-hour periods, separated by several weeks
Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

In crude and adjusted models, no statistically significant associations were observed between personal power-frequency magnetic field exposure metrics and fertility treatment or pregnancy outcomes. Effect estimates varied in direction depending on outcome and exposure metric/modeling approach.

Outcomes measured

  • Implantation
  • Clinical pregnancy
  • Live birth
  • Pregnancy loss
  • Fertility treatment outcomes

Limitations

  • Limited sample size
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "cohort",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "ELF",
    "source": "personal exposure (power-frequency magnetic fields)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "continuous monitoring for up to three consecutive 24-hour periods, separated by several weeks"
  },
  "population": "Women seeking fertility treatment at a fertility center (IVF and/or IUI)",
  "sample_size": 119,
  "outcomes": [
    "Implantation",
    "Clinical pregnancy",
    "Live birth",
    "Pregnancy loss",
    "Fertility treatment outcomes"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In crude and adjusted models, no statistically significant associations were observed between personal power-frequency magnetic field exposure metrics and fertility treatment or pregnancy outcomes. Effect estimates varied in direction depending on outcome and exposure metric/modeling approach.",
  "effect_direction": "no_effect",
  "limitations": [
    "Limited sample size"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "power-frequency magnetic fields",
    "ELF",
    "personal exposure monitoring",
    "fertility treatment",
    "IVF",
    "IUI",
    "implantation",
    "clinical pregnancy",
    "live birth",
    "pregnancy loss",
    "longitudinal cohort"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0.2,
      "reason": "Uses personal exposure monitors for power-frequency magnetic fields, but setting is fertility clinic rather than workplace; hub relevance is limited."
    }
  ]
}
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: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.05.044
PubMed: 33036793

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library