No effects of power line frequency extremely low frequency electromagnetic field exposure on selected neurobehavior tests of workers inspecting transformers and distribution line stations versus controls

Australas Phys Eng Sci Med · 2014 · No effect · Low evidence

← Research stream

No effectLow evidencePaper 2751

Among 310 inspection workers and 300 controls, neurobehavior test score changes showed no statistical significance, including across age and seniority subgroups. Spot measurements found some electric-field intensities above 5 kV/m in 500 kV and 220 kV areas, …

Study snapshot

PublicationAustralas Phys Eng Sci Med · 2014

Study typecross_sectional

Reported directionNo effect

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

We aimed to evaluate the interference of 50 Hz extremely low frequency electromagnetic field (ELF-EMF) occupational exposure on the neurobehavior tests of workers performing tour-inspection close to transformers and distribution power lines. Occupational short-term "spot" measurements were carried out. 310 inspection workers and 300 logistics staff were selected as exposure and control. The neurobehavior tests were performed through computer-based neurobehavior evaluation system, including mental arithmetic, curve coincide, simple visual reaction time, visual retention, auditory digit span and pursuit aiming. In 500 kV areas electric field intensity at 71.98% of total measured 590 spots were above 5 kV/m (national occupational standard), while in 220 kV areas electric field intensity at 15.69% of total 701 spots were above 5 kV/m. Magnetic field flux density at all the spots was below 1,000 μT (ICNIRP occupational standard). The neurobehavior score changes showed no statistical significance. Results of neurobehavior tests among different age, seniority groups showed no significant changes. Neurobehavior changes caused by daily repeated ELF-EMF exposure were not observed in the current study.

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 typecross_sectional

Effect directionno_effect

PopulationWorkers performing tour-inspection close to transformers and distribution power lines (exposed) versus logistics staff (controls)

Sample size610

ExposureELF · 0.05 MHz · short-term spot measurements; daily repeated exposure referenced

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Outcomes measured

Neurobehavior test performance (mental arithmetic)
Neurobehavior test performance (curve coincide)
Neurobehavior test performance (simple visual reaction time)
Neurobehavior test performance (visual retention)
Neurobehavior test performance (auditory digit span)
Neurobehavior test performance (pursuit aiming)
Electric field intensity (kV/m) spot measurements
Magnetic field flux density (µT) spot measurements

Limitations

Exposure assessment based on short-term 'spot' measurements (not personal long-term monitoring)
Only selected neurobehavior tests assessed; other neurological outcomes not reported
Study design and statistical details (e.g., adjustment for confounders) not described in the abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "cross_sectional",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "ELF",
    "source": "occupational",
    "frequency_mhz": 0.05,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "short-term spot measurements; daily repeated exposure referenced"
  },
  "population": "Workers performing tour-inspection close to transformers and distribution power lines (exposed) versus logistics staff (controls)",
  "sample_size": 610,
  "outcomes": [
    "Neurobehavior test performance (mental arithmetic)",
    "Neurobehavior test performance (curve coincide)",
    "Neurobehavior test performance (simple visual reaction time)",
    "Neurobehavior test performance (visual retention)",
    "Neurobehavior test performance (auditory digit span)",
    "Neurobehavior test performance (pursuit aiming)",
    "Electric field intensity (kV/m) spot measurements",
    "Magnetic field flux density (µT) spot measurements"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Among 310 inspection workers and 300 controls, neurobehavior test score changes showed no statistical significance, including across age and seniority subgroups. Spot measurements found some electric-field intensities above 5 kV/m in 500 kV and 220 kV areas, while magnetic flux density at all spots was below 1,000 µT (ICNIRP occupational standard).",
  "effect_direction": "no_effect",
  "limitations": [
    "Exposure assessment based on short-term 'spot' measurements (not personal long-term monitoring)",
    "Only selected neurobehavior tests assessed; other neurological outcomes not reported",
    "Study design and statistical details (e.g., adjustment for confounders) not described in the abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "extremely low frequency",
    "ELF-EMF",
    "50 Hz",
    "occupational exposure",
    "power lines",
    "transformers",
    "distribution line stations",
    "neurobehavior",
    "reaction time",
    "electric field",
    "magnetic field",
    "ICNIRP"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0.9,
      "reason": "Study compares occupationally exposed inspection workers near transformers/power lines with workplace controls and includes field measurements."
    }
  ]
}

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: 10.1007/s13246-013-0237-6
PubMed: 24379132

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library