SynthesisEnvironmental health : a global access science source2017
Biological effects of exposure to static electric fields in humans and vertebrates: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Environmental health : a global access science source, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Biological and health-related effects of weak static magnetic fields (≤ 1 mT) in humans and vertebrates: A systematic review.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Exposure of laboratory animals to small air ions: a systematic review of biological and behavioral studies.Biomedical engineering online · 2018Pooled it
- The importance of hair in human perception of electric fields - A double-blind repeated measures study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Electric field-induced inflammatory and angiogenic responses in rat female reproductive tissues: evidence for early extracellular matrix remodeling.Histochemistry and cell biology · 2026Article
- Whole-Body Electrostatic Pain Treatment in Adults with Chronic Pain: A Prospective Multicentric Observational Clinical Trial.Pain and therapy · 2024Article
- Using electric fields to control insects: current applications and future directions.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2024Review
- The role of the AC component in human perception of AC-DC hybrid electric fields.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Electrostatic Discharge Causing Pump Shutdown in HeartMate 3.JACC. Case reports · 2021Article
- Cytotoxic T cells response with decreased CD4/CD8 ratio during mammary tumors inhibition in rats induced by non-contact electric fields.F1000Research · 2021Article
- Challenges in coupling atmospheric electricity with biological systems.International journal of biometeorology · 2021Article
- Possible molecular and cellular mechanisms at the basis of atmospheric electromagnetic field bioeffects.International journal of biometeorology · 2021Review
- The role of magnetic fields in neurodegenerative diseases.International journal of biometeorology · 2021Review
- Direct Differentiation of Human Primary Fibroblast into Hematopoietic-Like Stem Cells; A New Way without Viral Transduction.Cell journal · 2020Article
- Atmospheric Electricity Influencing Biogeochemical Processes in Soils and Sediments.Frontiers in physiology · 2019Article
- Studies on effects of static electric field exposure on liver in mice.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Directionally non-rotating electric field therapy delivered through implanted electrodes as a glioblastoma treatment platform: A proof-of-principle study.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh-voltage direct current (HVDC) lines are the technology of choice for the transport of large amounts of energy over long distances. The operation of these lines produces static electric fields (EF), but the data reviewed in previous assessments were not sufficient to assess the need for any environmental limit. The aim of this systematic review was to update the current state of research and to evaluate biological effects of static EF.
methodsUsing the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) recommendations, we collected and evaluated experimental and epidemiological studies examining biological effects of exposure to static EF in humans (n = 8) and vertebrates (n = 40).
resultsThere is good evidence that humans and animals are able to perceive the presence of static EF at sufficiently high levels. Hair movements caused by electrostatic forces may play a major role in this perception. A large number of studies reported responses of animals (e.g., altered metabolic, immunologic or developmental parameters) to a broad range of static EF strengths as well, but these responses are likely secondary physiological responses to sensory stimulation. Furthermore, the quality of many of the studies reporting physiological responses is poor, which raises concerns about confounding.
conclusionThe weight of the evidence from the literature reviewed did not indicate that static EF have adverse biological effects in humans or animals. The evidence strongly supported the role of superficial sensory stimulation of hair and skin as the basis for perception of the field, as well as reported indirect behavioral and physiological responses. Physical considerations also preclude any direct effect of static EF on internal physiology, and reports that some physiological processes are affected in minor ways may be explained by other factors. While this literature does not support a level of concern about biological effects of exposure to static EF, the conditions that affect thresholds for human detection and possible annoyance at suprathreshold levels should be investigated.
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.