ArticleBMC public health2016
Characterisation of exposure to non-ionising electromagnetic fields in the Spanish INMA birth cohort: study protocol.
Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- RF-EMF Exposure Assessment: Comparison of Measurements in Airports and Flights with and Without Wi-Fi Service.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Socioeconomic Inequalities in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disorder: Results from an Iranian Cohort Study.Middle East journal of digestive diseases · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnalysis of the association between exposure to electromagnetic fields of non-ionising radiation (EMF-NIR) and health in children and adolescents is hindered by the limited availability of data, mainly due to the difficulties on the exposure assessment. This study protocol describes the methodologies used for characterising exposure of children to EMF-NIR in the INMA (INfancia y Medio Ambiente- Environment and Childhood) Project, a prospective cohort study. METHODS/
designIndirect (proximity to emission sources, questionnaires on sources use and geospatial propagation models) and direct methods (spot and fixed longer-term measurements and personal measurements) were conducted in order to assess exposure levels of study participants aged between 7 and 18 years old. The methodology used varies depending on the frequency of the EMF-NIR and the environment (homes, schools and parks). Questionnaires assessed the use of sources contributing both to Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) and Radiofrequency (RF) exposure levels. Geospatial propagation models (NISMap) are implemented and validated for environmental outdoor sources of RFs using spot measurements. Spot and fixed longer-term ELF and RF measurements were done in the environments where children spend most of the time. Moreover, personal measurements were taken in order to assess individual exposure to RF. The exposure data are used to explore their relationships with proximity and/or use of EMF-NIR sources. DISCUSSION: Characterisation of the EMF-NIR exposure by this combination of methods is intended to overcome problems encountered in other research. The assessment of exposure of INMA cohort children and adolescents living in different regions of Spain to the full frequency range of EMF-NIR extends the characterisation of environmental exposures in this cohort. Together with other data obtained in the project, on socioeconomic and family characteristics and development of the children and adolescents, this will enable to evaluate the complex interaction between health outcomes in children and adolescents and the various environmental factors that surround them.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.