Scientometric study of the effects of exposure to non-ionizing EMF on fertility: Understanding reasons of partial failure

2017 · Unclear · Insufficient evidence

← Research stream

UnclearInsufficient evidencePaper 2210

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2017

Study typeother

Reported directionUnclear

Evidence ratingInsufficient

Abstract

Scientometric study of the effects of exposure to non-ionizing EMF on fertility: Understanding reasons of partial failure Bernabò N, Ciccarelli R, Greco L, Ordinelli A, Mattioli M, Barboni B. Scientometric study of the effects of exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on fertility: A contribution to understanding the reasons of partial failure. PLoS One. 2017 Dec 6;12(12):e0187890. Abstract The exposure to Non-Ionizing-Electromagnetic Fields (NI-EMFs) is often indicated as a cofactor responsible for the fertility reduction, which has been described in recent years. Despite the great interest in this topic and the research effort in exploring it, to date, there are no reliable data. Therefore, we carried out a scientometric analysis of the scientific literature published in peer reviewed Journals concerning this topic to better understand the reasons of this partial failure. To this aim, we identified and analysed 104 papers, published in last 26 years in peer-reviewed Journals, present in ISI Web of Knowledge Core Collection. Then, we analysed the impact of the Journals in which the papers were published as well as that of the single papers, the paper citation dynamics, the keywords citation busts, the geographical localization of citations and the co-authorship dynamics of the Authors. As a result, we found that different animal models (rodent, rabbit, guinea pig, and swine) and different experimental approaches (epidemiological vs. experimental studies) have the same impact, highlighting the lack of universally adopted standard in research activity. The analysis of the temporal trend in keywords and the high differences in citations between the different countries (also in those belonging to the same geographical and socio-economical area) pointed out the difficulties in approaching this branch of study. Lastly, it was evident that the Authors did not behave as a connected community, but as unconnected clusters of very small size. In conclusion, based on the results of our analysis, we think that important efforts must be undertaken to adopt more standardized models and to improve the research quality and the information exchange within the scientific community, with the aim of improving the reliability and usefulness of the results of research regarding the effect of NI-EMFs on fertility. 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 typeother

Effect directionunclear

PopulationNot supplied

Sample size104

ExposureNot supplied

Evidence strengthInsufficientConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Scientometric analysis of 104 peer-reviewed papers on non-ionizing EMF exposure and fertility found similar impact across different animal models and across epidemiological vs experimental approaches, suggesting a lack of universally adopted research standards. The authors report substantial differences in citations across countries and that authorship networks appeared as small, unconnected clusters, and conclude that more standardized models and improved research quality/information exchange are needed to improve reliability of findings.

Outcomes measured

fertility
research standardization/quality (scientometric indicators)
citation dynamics
keywords trends
geographical localization of citations
co-authorship dynamics

Limitations

Scientometric/bibliometric analysis rather than primary exposure-outcome study; does not provide direct estimates of EMF effects on fertility
No specific EMF frequency, source, dose (e.g., SAR), or exposure duration details provided in the abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "other",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": null,
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": 104,
  "outcomes": [
    "fertility",
    "research standardization/quality (scientometric indicators)",
    "citation dynamics",
    "keywords trends",
    "geographical localization of citations",
    "co-authorship dynamics"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Scientometric analysis of 104 peer-reviewed papers on non-ionizing EMF exposure and fertility found similar impact across different animal models and across epidemiological vs experimental approaches, suggesting a lack of universally adopted research standards. The authors report substantial differences in citations across countries and that authorship networks appeared as small, unconnected clusters, and conclude that more standardized models and improved research quality/information exchange are needed to improve reliability of findings.",
  "effect_direction": "unclear",
  "limitations": [
    "Scientometric/bibliometric analysis rather than primary exposure-outcome study; does not provide direct estimates of EMF effects on fertility",
    "No specific EMF frequency, source, dose (e.g., SAR), or exposure duration details provided in the abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "non-ionizing electromagnetic fields",
    "NI-EMFs",
    "fertility",
    "scientometric analysis",
    "bibliometrics",
    "citation dynamics",
    "co-authorship"
  ],
  "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: Not supplied
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library