ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Measurement of Intermediate Frequency Magnetic Fields Generated by Household Induction Cookers for Epidemiological Studies and Development of an Exposure Estimation Model.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. 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.
- Evaluation of Exposure Assessment Methods and Procedures for Induction Hobs.Bioelectromagnetics · 2025Article
- Association Between the Use of Induction Heating Cookers and Delivery Outcomes in Pregnant Women: An Internet-Based Cohort Study.Environmental health insights · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionExposure assessment of intermediate frequency (IF) electromagnetic fields (EMFs) is difficult and epidemiological studies are limited. In the present study, we aimed to estimate the exposure of pregnant women to IF-EMFs generated by induction cookers in the household using a questionnaire and discussed its applicability to epidemiological studies.
methodTwo main home-visit surveys were conducted: a Phase 1 survey to develop an estimation model and a Phase 2 survey to validate the model. The estimation model included the following variables: wattage, cookware diameter, and distance from the hob center (center of the stove). Four models were constructed to determine the importance of each variable and the general applicability for epidemiological studies. In addition, estimated exposure values were calculated based on the Phase 2 survey questionnaire responses and compared with the actual measured values using the Spearman rank correlation coefficient.
resultThe average value of the magnetic field measured in the Phase 1 survey was 0.23 μT (variance: 0.13) at a horizontal distance of 30 cm at the height of the cooking table. The highest validity model was inputted distance from the hob center to the body surface that is variable (correlation coefficient = 0.54, 95% confidence interval: 0.22-0.75). No clear differences were identified in the correlation coefficients for each model (z-value: 0.09-0.18, DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsNo differences were found in the validity of the four models. This could be due to the biased wattage of the validation population, and for versatility it would be preferable to use three variables (distance, wattage, and estimation using the diameter of the cookware) whenever possible. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic measurement of magnetic fields generated by more than 70 induction cookers in a real household environment. This study will contribute to finding dose-response relationships in epidemiological studies of intermediate-frequency exposure without the use of instrumentation. One of the limitations of this study is it estimates instantaneous exposure in place during cooking only.
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.