ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2024
Regression calibration of self-reported mobile phone use to optimize quantitative risk estimation in the COSMOS study.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personal radio use and risk of cancers among police officers in Great Britain: Results from the airwave health monitoring study.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Detailed assessment of night shift work aspects and potential mediators of its health effects: the contribution of field studies.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Use of Mobile Phones and Radiofrequency-Emitting Devices in the COSMOS-France Cohort.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Cohort Study of Mobile Phone Use and Health (COSMOS) has repeatedly collected self-reported and operator-recorded data on mobile phone use. Assessing health effects using self-reported information is prone to measurement error, but operator data were available prospectively for only part of the study population and did not cover past mobile phone use. To optimize the available data and reduce bias, we evaluated different statistical approaches for constructing mobile phone exposure histories within COSMOS. We evaluated and compared the performance of 4 regression calibration (RC) methods (simple, direct, inverse, and generalized additive model for location, shape, and scale), complete-case analysis, and multiple imputation in a simulation study with a binary health outcome. We used self-reported and operator-recorded mobile phone call data collected at baseline (2007-2012) from participants in Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Parameter estimates obtained using simple, direct, and inverse RC methods were associated with less bias and lower mean squared error than those obtained with complete-case analysis or multiple imputation. We showed that RC methods resulted in more accurate estimation of the relationship between mobile phone use and health outcomes by combining self-reported data with objective operator-recorded data available for a subset of participants.
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.