Does exposure to environmental radiofrequency electromagnetic fields cause cognitive and behavioral effects in 10-year-old boys?

Bioelectromagnetics · 2016 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 4886

Study snapshot

PublicationBioelectromagnetics · 2016

Study typecohort

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

The relationship between exposure to electromagnetic fields from non-ionizing radiation and adverse human health effects remains controversial. We aimed to explore the association of environmental radiofrequency-electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) exposure with neurobehavioral function of children. A subsample of 123 boys belonging to the Environment and Childhood cohort from Granada (Spain), recruited at birth from 2000 through 2002, were evaluated at the age of 9-11 years. Spot electric field measurements within the 100 kHz to 6 GHz frequency range, expressed as both root mean-square (S(RMS) and maximum power density (S(MAX)) magnitudes, were performed in the immediate surrounds of childreńs dwellings. Neurocognitive and behavioral functions were assessed with a comprehensive battery of tests. Multivariate linear and logistic regression models were used, adjusting for potential confounders. All measurements were lower than reference guideline limits, with median S(RMS) and S(MAX) values of 285.94 and 2759.68 μW/m(2), respectively. Most of the cognitive and behavioral parameters did not show any effect, but children living in higher RF exposure areas (above median S(RMS) levels) had lower scores for verbal expression/comprehension and higher scores for internalizing and total problems, and obsessive-compulsive and post-traumatic stress disorders, in comparison to those living in areas with lower exposure. These associations were stronger when S(MAX) values were considered. Although some of our results may suggest that low-level environmental RF-EMF exposure has a negative impact on cognitive and/or behavior development in children; given limitations in the study design and that the majority of neurobehavioral functioning tasks were not affected, definitive conclusions cannot be drawn.

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

PopulationBoys from the Environment and Childhood cohort (Granada, Spain), assessed at age 9–11 years

Sample size123

ExposureRF

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Spot measurements of RF-EMF (100 kHz to 6 GHz) around children’s dwellings were all below reference guideline limits. Most cognitive and behavioral parameters showed no association with exposure, but boys living in higher exposure areas (above median S(RMS)) had lower verbal expression/comprehension scores and higher internalizing/total problems and obsessive-compulsive and post-traumatic stress disorder scores; associations were stronger using S(MAX). The authors state definitive conclusions cannot be drawn due to study limitations and because most tasks were unaffected.

Outcomes measured

Neurocognitive function (battery of tests)
Behavioral function/problems (including internalizing and total problems)
Verbal expression/comprehension scores
Obsessive-compulsive disorder scores
Post-traumatic stress disorder scores

Limitations

Observational design; authors note limitations in study design and inability to draw definitive conclusions
Exposure assessment based on spot measurements around dwellings (may not reflect long-term/personal exposure)
Majority of neurobehavioral tasks were not affected

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "cohort",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "environmental (around dwellings)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "Boys from the Environment and Childhood cohort (Granada, Spain), assessed at age 9–11 years",
  "sample_size": 123,
  "outcomes": [
    "Neurocognitive function (battery of tests)",
    "Behavioral function/problems (including internalizing and total problems)",
    "Verbal expression/comprehension scores",
    "Obsessive-compulsive disorder scores",
    "Post-traumatic stress disorder scores"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Spot measurements of RF-EMF (100 kHz to 6 GHz) around children’s dwellings were all below reference guideline limits. Most cognitive and behavioral parameters showed no association with exposure, but boys living in higher exposure areas (above median S(RMS)) had lower verbal expression/comprehension scores and higher internalizing/total problems and obsessive-compulsive and post-traumatic stress disorder scores; associations were stronger using S(MAX). The authors state definitive conclusions cannot be drawn due to study limitations and because most tasks were unaffected.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Observational design; authors note limitations in study design and inability to draw definitive conclusions",
    "Exposure assessment based on spot measurements around dwellings (may not reflect long-term/personal exposure)",
    "Majority of neurobehavioral tasks were not affected"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "RF-EMF",
    "radiofrequency",
    "environmental exposure",
    "children",
    "boys",
    "neurobehavioral",
    "cognition",
    "behavior",
    "power density",
    "spot measurements",
    "Spain"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0.32,
      "reason": "Mentions exposures were below reference guideline limits (context of guideline-based assessment)."
    }
  ]
}

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: 10.1002/bem.21951
PubMed: 26769168

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library