Modeled & Perceived Exposure to RF EMF From Mobile-Phone Base Stations & Development of Symptoms Over Time in General Population Cohort

2017 · Mixed · Moderate evidence

← Research stream
MixedModerate evidencePaper 2277

Modeled and perceived RF-EMF exposure from mobile-phone base stations were weakly correlated at baseline (Spearman r = 0.10). In a subset with substantial modeled exposure increases (>0.030 mW/m2) from T0 to T1, increased modeled exposure was associated with …

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2017
Study typecohort
Reported directionMixed
Evidence ratingModerate

Abstract

Modeled & Perceived Exposure to RF EMF From Mobile-Phone Base Stations & Development of Symptoms Over Time in General Population Cohort Martens AL, Slottje P, Timmermans DR, Kromhout H, Reedijk M, Vermeulen RC, Smid T. Modeled and Perceived Exposure to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields From Mobile-Phone Base Stations and the Development of Symptoms Over Time in a General Population Cohort. Am J Epidemiol. 2017 Apr 7:1-10. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwx041. Abstract We assessed associations between modeled and perceived exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) from mobile-phone base stations and the development of nonspecific symptoms and sleep disturbances over time. A population-based Dutch cohort study, the Occupational and Environmental Health Cohort Study (AMIGO) (n = 14,829; ages 31-65 years), was established in 2011/2012 (T0), with follow-up of a subgroup (n = 3,992 invited) in 2013 (T1; n = 2,228) and 2014 (T2; n = 1,740). We modeled far-field RF-EMF exposure from mobile-phone base stations at the home addresses of the participants using a 3-dimensional geospatial model (NISMap). Perceived exposure (0 = not at all; 6 = very much), nonspecific symptoms, and sleep disturbances were assessed by questionnaire. We performed cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, including fixed-effects regression. We found small correlations between modeled and perceived exposure in AMIGO participants at baseline (n = 14,309; rSpearman = 0.10). For 222 follow-up participants, modeled exposure increased substantially (>0.030 mW/m2) between T0 and T1. This increase in modeled exposure was associated with an increase in perceived exposure during the same time period. In contrast to modeled RF-EMF exposure from mobile-phone base stations, perceived exposure was associated with higher symptom reporting scores in both cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, as well as with sleep disturbances in cross-sectional analyses. 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 directionmixed
PopulationGeneral population Dutch cohort (AMIGO), ages 31–65 years
Sample size14829
ExposureRF · Baseline 2011/2012 (T0) with follow-up in 2013 (T1) and 2014 (T2)
Evidence strengthModerateConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Modeled and perceived RF-EMF exposure from mobile-phone base stations were weakly correlated at baseline (Spearman r = 0.10). In a subset with substantial modeled exposure increases (>0.030 mW/m2) from T0 to T1, increased modeled exposure was associated with increased perceived exposure. Perceived exposure (but not modeled exposure) was associated with higher symptom reporting scores in cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, and with sleep disturbances in cross-sectional analyses.

Outcomes measured

  • nonspecific symptoms
  • sleep disturbances
  • perceived RF-EMF exposure

Limitations

  • Exposure was modeled at home addresses (far-field) and perceived exposure was self-reported via questionnaire
  • Small correlation between modeled and perceived exposure suggests potential exposure misclassification or differing constructs
  • Sleep disturbance association with perceived exposure reported only in cross-sectional analyses
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "cohort",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "mobile phone base station",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "Baseline 2011/2012 (T0) with follow-up in 2013 (T1) and 2014 (T2)"
  },
  "population": "General population Dutch cohort (AMIGO), ages 31–65 years",
  "sample_size": 14829,
  "outcomes": [
    "nonspecific symptoms",
    "sleep disturbances",
    "perceived RF-EMF exposure"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Modeled and perceived RF-EMF exposure from mobile-phone base stations were weakly correlated at baseline (Spearman r = 0.10). In a subset with substantial modeled exposure increases (>0.030 mW/m2) from T0 to T1, increased modeled exposure was associated with increased perceived exposure. Perceived exposure (but not modeled exposure) was associated with higher symptom reporting scores in cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, and with sleep disturbances in cross-sectional analyses.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Exposure was modeled at home addresses (far-field) and perceived exposure was self-reported via questionnaire",
    "Small correlation between modeled and perceived exposure suggests potential exposure misclassification or differing constructs",
    "Sleep disturbance association with perceived exposure reported only in cross-sectional analyses"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "moderate",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "RF-EMF",
    "radio-frequency electromagnetic fields",
    "mobile-phone base stations",
    "modeled exposure",
    "perceived exposure",
    "nonspecific symptoms",
    "sleep disturbances",
    "cohort",
    "AMIGO",
    "NISMap"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0.2,
      "reason": "Epidemiologic evidence on RF-EMF health symptoms relevant to exposure guideline discussions"
    }
  ]
}
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: 10.1093/aje/kwx041
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library