The effect of mobile phone to audiologic system.

Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet · 2005 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 5151

In the full sample, comparison of audiograms (pure tone and speech audiometry) between the dominant and nondominant side showed no significant difference. In a subgroup of 8 subjects who used a mobile phone more than 60 minutes per day, the hearing threshold …

Study snapshot

PublicationJournal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet · 2005

Study typecross_sectional

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Mobile phones have come into widespread use. There are a lot of possible adverse effect to health. Use of mobile phone generate potentially harmful radiofrequency electromagnetic field (EMF) particularly for the hearing aspect. 98 subjects underwent hearing evaluations at Department of Otolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Chulalongkorn University. 31 males and 67females, mean age was 30.48 +/- 9.51 years old, all subjects were investigated the hearing level by audiometry, tympanometry, otoacoustic emission (OAE) and auditory brain stem evoked response (ABR). The average of using time were 32.54 +/- 27.64 months, 57 subjects usually used the right side and 41 the left side. Average time of use per day was 26.31 +/- 30.91 minutes (range from 3 to 180 mins). When the authors compared the audiogram, both pure tone and speech audiometry, between the dominant and nondominant side, it indicated that there is no significant different. When the authors focused on the 8 subjects that used the mobile phone more than 60 mins per day. It indicated that the hearing threshold of the dominant ears was worse than the nondominant ears.

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 directionmixed

PopulationPatients/subjects undergoing hearing evaluations at an otolaryngology department (King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thailand); mean age 30.48 +/- 9.51 years; 31 males, 67 females

Sample size98

ExposureRF · Average use 32.54 +/- 27.64 months; average 26.31 +/- 30.91 minutes/day (range 3–180); subgroup >60 minutes/day (n=8)

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Outcomes measured

Pure tone audiometry
Speech audiometry
Tympanometry
Otoacoustic emission (OAE)
Auditory brain stem evoked response (ABR)
Hearing threshold differences between dominant vs nondominant ear

Limitations

Frequency/SAR of phone exposure not reported
Subgroup with >60 minutes/day use was small (n=8)
Study design appears cross-sectional and compares dominant vs nondominant ear rather than an unexposed control group
Statistical details beyond 'no significant different' not provided in abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "cross_sectional",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "mobile phone",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "Average use 32.54 +/- 27.64 months; average 26.31 +/- 30.91 minutes/day (range 3–180); subgroup >60 minutes/day (n=8)"
  },
  "population": "Patients/subjects undergoing hearing evaluations at an otolaryngology department (King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thailand); mean age 30.48 +/- 9.51 years; 31 males, 67 females",
  "sample_size": 98,
  "outcomes": [
    "Pure tone audiometry",
    "Speech audiometry",
    "Tympanometry",
    "Otoacoustic emission (OAE)",
    "Auditory brain stem evoked response (ABR)",
    "Hearing threshold differences between dominant vs nondominant ear"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In the full sample, comparison of audiograms (pure tone and speech audiometry) between the dominant and nondominant side showed no significant difference. In a subgroup of 8 subjects who used a mobile phone more than 60 minutes per day, the hearing threshold of the dominant ear was worse than the nondominant ear.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Frequency/SAR of phone exposure not reported",
    "Subgroup with >60 minutes/day use was small (n=8)",
    "Study design appears cross-sectional and compares dominant vs nondominant ear rather than an unexposed control group",
    "Statistical details beyond 'no significant different' not provided in abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "mobile phone",
    "radiofrequency",
    "EMF",
    "hearing",
    "audiometry",
    "otoacoustic emission",
    "auditory brainstem response",
    "tympanometry"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "mobile-phones",
      "weight": 0.9,
      "reason": "Study evaluates hearing outcomes in relation to mobile phone use (RF EMF)."
    }
  ]
}

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: 16623034

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library