[Epidemiological risk assessment of pathology development in occupational exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields].

Radiatsionnaia biologiia, radioecologiia · 2003 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream

HarmLow evidencePaper 5249

Study snapshot

PublicationRadiatsionnaia biologiia, radioecologiia · 2003

Study typecross_sectional

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

A cross-sectional study of working conditions and health of the personnel of the civil aircraft radar-tracking system has been conducted based on periodical health examinations. The personnel was divided into three occupational groups. Group I was exposed to EMF EHF, group II--to EMF HF and UHF and group III was not exposed to EMF (reference group). The groups didn't differ in any occupational and non-occupational parameters. Health status of 250 workers was examined. High prevalence rate of cardiovascular diseases (ICD-X I00-I99) was found in the exposed groups. Odds ratio (OR) was 3.78 (95% CI 1.96-7.27) in group I and 2.13 (95% CI 1.13-4.03) in group II. High prevalence rate of cardiovascular diseases is explained by arterial hypertension (ICD-X I10-I15) (OR = 1.96 95% CI 1.04-3.70 in group I and OR = 1.80 95% CI 0.93-3.50 in group II) and ischemic heart disease (ICD-X I20-I25) (OR = 7.9 95% CI 3.48-18.06 in group I; OR = 3.0 95% CI 1.23-7.33--in group II). In the exposed groups cardiovascular diseases were developed in young age. OR was 7.04 (95% CI 1.64-30.19) in group I and 4.33 (95% CI 0.96-19.65) in group II in 30-39 age sub groups. Myocardium infarction was found in 2 out of 16 persons of this age in the group exposed to EMF.

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 directionharm

PopulationPersonnel of the civil aircraft radar-tracking system (workers undergoing periodical health examinations)

Sample size250

ExposureRF

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

In this cross-sectional study of 250 workers, higher prevalence of cardiovascular diseases was reported in EMF-exposed groups compared with a non-exposed reference group. Reported odds ratios for cardiovascular diseases were 3.78 (95% CI 1.96–7.27) for the EHF-exposed group and 2.13 (95% CI 1.13–4.03) for the HF/UHF-exposed group; elevated odds were also reported for hypertension and ischemic heart disease, with particularly high ORs for ischemic heart disease in the EHF group. Cardiovascular diseases were reported to occur at younger ages in exposed groups (e.g., ages 30–39: OR 7.04 in group I; OR 4.33 in group II), and myocardial infarction was observed in 2 of 16 persons aged 30–39 in an exposed group.

Outcomes measured

Cardiovascular diseases (ICD-10 I00-I99)
Arterial hypertension (ICD-10 I10-I15)
Ischemic heart disease (ICD-10 I20-I25)
Myocardial infarction

Limitations

Cross-sectional design limits causal inference and temporality
Exposure characterization is broad (EHF vs HF/UHF) with no quantitative exposure metrics (e.g., frequency, power density, SAR) reported in abstract
Potential residual confounding cannot be assessed from abstract (details of adjustment not provided)
Outcome ascertainment based on periodical health examinations; diagnostic criteria and blinding not described

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "cross_sectional",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "occupational (civil aircraft radar-tracking system personnel)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "Personnel of the civil aircraft radar-tracking system (workers undergoing periodical health examinations)",
  "sample_size": 250,
  "outcomes": [
    "Cardiovascular diseases (ICD-10 I00-I99)",
    "Arterial hypertension (ICD-10 I10-I15)",
    "Ischemic heart disease (ICD-10 I20-I25)",
    "Myocardial infarction"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In this cross-sectional study of 250 workers, higher prevalence of cardiovascular diseases was reported in EMF-exposed groups compared with a non-exposed reference group. Reported odds ratios for cardiovascular diseases were 3.78 (95% CI 1.96–7.27) for the EHF-exposed group and 2.13 (95% CI 1.13–4.03) for the HF/UHF-exposed group; elevated odds were also reported for hypertension and ischemic heart disease, with particularly high ORs for ischemic heart disease in the EHF group. Cardiovascular diseases were reported to occur at younger ages in exposed groups (e.g., ages 30–39: OR 7.04 in group I; OR 4.33 in group II), and myocardial infarction was observed in 2 of 16 persons aged 30–39 in an exposed group.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "Cross-sectional design limits causal inference and temporality",
    "Exposure characterization is broad (EHF vs HF/UHF) with no quantitative exposure metrics (e.g., frequency, power density, SAR) reported in abstract",
    "Potential residual confounding cannot be assessed from abstract (details of adjustment not provided)",
    "Outcome ascertainment based on periodical health examinations; diagnostic criteria and blinding not described"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "occupational exposure",
    "radar",
    "radiofrequency electromagnetic fields",
    "EHF",
    "HF",
    "UHF",
    "cardiovascular disease",
    "hypertension",
    "ischemic heart disease",
    "myocardial infarction",
    "odds ratio"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0.9,
      "reason": "Study evaluates health outcomes in workers occupationally exposed to RF EMF in a radar-tracking system."
    }
  ]
}

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: 14658291

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library