RF Safe

[Effects of electromagnetic radiation from handsets of cellular telephone on neurobehavioral function].

Wei sheng yan jiu = Journal of hygiene research · 2000 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream
HarmLow evidencePaper 3935

Among 81 handset users vs 63 non-users, the users had longer average reaction time (P < 0.01). Duration/length of handset use was negatively associated with corrected reaction number (P < 0.01) and positively associated with fast reaction time and slowest rea…

Study snapshot

PublicationWei sheng yan jiu = Journal of hygiene research · 2000
Study typecohort
Reported directionHarm
Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

In order to study the effects of electromagnetic radiation from handsets of cellular telephone on neurobehavioral function, 81 staff with handsets of cellular telephone and 63 staff without handsets of cellular telephone from corporations were selected as the subjects. The subjects were investigated by questionnaire on their general health, lifestyle habit, suppress of spirit, handset using of cellular telephone, environmental exposure, morbidity, and the neurobehavioral core test battery(NCTB). The data was analyzed by chi-square, stepwise regression analysis and covariance statistics. The results showed that the average reaction time in user's group was longer than that in control group (P < 0.01). The time of using handset was negatively associated with corrected reaction number (P < 0.01). The fast reaction time and the slowest reaction time were positively associated with the length of handset using (P < 0.01, P < 0.05). The results suggested that the handset using could cause adverse health effects in neurobehavioral function.

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 directionharm
PopulationCorporation staff with and without cellular telephone handsets
Sample size144
Exposurehandset use duration/length of handset using
Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 72% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Among 81 handset users vs 63 non-users, the users had longer average reaction time (P < 0.01). Duration/length of handset use was negatively associated with corrected reaction number (P < 0.01) and positively associated with fast reaction time and slowest reaction time (P < 0.01; P < 0.05).

Outcomes measured

  • Neurobehavioral function (Neurobehavioral Core Test Battery, NCTB)
  • Reaction time
  • Corrected reaction number

Limitations

  • Exposure metrics (e.g., frequency, SAR) not reported in abstract
  • Non-randomized comparison of users vs non-users; potential confounding despite regression/covariance analyses
  • Outcomes and exposure appear based partly on questionnaire/self-report
  • Timing/temporality of exposure vs outcome assessment not clearly described in abstract
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "cohort",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "mobile phone",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "handset use duration/length of handset using"
  },
  "population": "Corporation staff with and without cellular telephone handsets",
  "sample_size": 144,
  "outcomes": [
    "Neurobehavioral function (Neurobehavioral Core Test Battery, NCTB)",
    "Reaction time",
    "Corrected reaction number"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Among 81 handset users vs 63 non-users, the users had longer average reaction time (P < 0.01). Duration/length of handset use was negatively associated with corrected reaction number (P < 0.01) and positively associated with fast reaction time and slowest reaction time (P < 0.01; P < 0.05).",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "Exposure metrics (e.g., frequency, SAR) not reported in abstract",
    "Non-randomized comparison of users vs non-users; potential confounding despite regression/covariance analyses",
    "Outcomes and exposure appear based partly on questionnaire/self-report",
    "Timing/temporality of exposure vs outcome assessment not clearly described in abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.72,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "cellular telephone",
    "handset",
    "electromagnetic radiation",
    "neurobehavioral function",
    "reaction time",
    "NCTB",
    "occupational population"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0.6,
      "reason": "Study population is corporation staff (workforce) comparing handset users vs non-users."
    }
  ]
}
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: 12725088

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library