ArticleJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology2015
What input data are needed to accurately model electromagnetic fields from mobile phone base stations?
Article in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure in everyday microenvironments in Europe: A systematic literature review.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2018Pooled it
- Spatial variability of outdoor exposure to radiofrequency radiation from mobile phone base stations, in Khartoum, Sudan.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
- Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure assessment: a pilot study on mobile phone signal strength and transmitted power levels.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2021Article
- Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation and Memory Performance: Sources of Uncertainty in Epidemiological Cohort Studies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Review
- Time averaged transmitter power and exposure to electromagnetic fields from mobile phone base stations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increase in mobile communication technology has led to concern about potential health effects of radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) from mobile phone base stations. Different RF-EMF prediction models have been applied to assess population exposure to RF-EMF. Our study examines what input data are needed to accurately model RF-EMF, as detailed data are not always available for epidemiological studies. We used NISMap, a 3D radio wave propagation model, to test models with various levels of detail in building and antenna input data. The model outcomes were compared with outdoor measurements taken in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Results showed good agreement between modelled and measured RF-EMF when 3D building data and basic antenna information (location, height, frequency and direction) were used: Spearman correlations were >0.6. Model performance was not sensitive to changes in building damping parameters. Antenna-specific information about down-tilt, type and output power did not significantly improve model performance compared with using average down-tilt and power values, or assuming one standard antenna type. We conclude that 3D radio wave propagation modelling is a feasible approach to predict outdoor RF-EMF levels for ranking exposure levels in epidemiological studies, when 3D building data and information on the antenna height, frequency, location and direction are available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24472756What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.