ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021
30 Hz, Could It Be Part of a Window Frequency for Cellular Response?
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precise Electromagnetic Modulation of the Cell Cycle and Its Applications in Cancer Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy Alters the Genomic Profile of Bladder Cancer Cell Line HT-1197.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Low-frequency magnetic field therapy for glioblastoma: Current advances, mechanisms, challenges and future perspectives.Journal of advanced research · 2025Review
- The Frequency of a Magnetic Field Determines the Behavior of Tumor and Non-Tumor Nerve Cell Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- The Cellular Response Is Determined by a Combination of Different ELF-EMF Exposure Parameters: A Scope Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Exposure to 10 Hz Pulsed Magnetic Fields Do Not Induce Cellular Senescence in Human Fetal Lung Fibroblasts.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many exogenous and endogenous risk factors have been proposed as precursors of brain tumors, including the exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. Nevertheless, there is still a debate among the scientific community about the hazard of the effects produced by non-ionizing radiation (NIR) because conflicting results have been found (number of articles reviewed >50). For that reason, to provide new evidence on the possible effects produced by exposure to NIR, we performed different studies with several combinations of extremely low frequencies, times, and field intensities in tumoral and non-tumoral cells. The results of our studies showed that cell viability was frequency dependent in glioblastoma cells. In fact, our results revealed that a frequency of 30 Hz-or even other frequencies close to 30 Hz-could constitute a window frequency determinant of the cellular response in tumoral and non-tumoral cells.
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.