ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Effects of website-based risk communication of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields on general public.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) are utilized in communications and appliances and are indispensable in daily life. However, some people have concerns about the adverse health effects of RF-EMFs; therefore, effective risk communication (RC) is needed in this field. Objective: In this study, we investigate public attitudes towards RF-EMFs and examine the impact of RC via a website on these attitudes and objective knowledge. Methods: Three web surveys were conducted over 10 weeks with the same participants. The questionnaires were conducted at three different time points with 5-week intervals: baseline survey (T1), RC evaluation survey (T2), and follow-up survey (T3). Participants of T2 were randomly recruited from among those of T1, and participants of T3 were randomly selected from among the T2 respondents. Approximately half of the respondents in each of T2 and T3 were assigned to the control group. Twelve items regarding attitudes toward RF-EMFs and objective knowledge were evaluated in all surveys (T1-T3). After removing low-engagement data, the number of valid answers was 782 in T3. Differences between T1 and T2 (Sub T1-T2) and T1 and T3 (Sub T1-T3) were analyzed. Participant selection was randomized and the authors were blind to this selection until analysis. Results: Four clusters were identified: Cluster 1 (Non-anxious, 25.0%), Cluster 2 (Anxious, 16.0%), Cluster 3 (Low-interest, 40.5%), and Cluster 4 (High-interest, 18.5%). A decrease in subjective RF-EMF exposure levels was noted in Cluster 2 immediately after website viewing. Temporary increases and decreases in health concerns about RF-EMF usage activities were observed in Clusters 1 and 2, respectively, immediately after viewing. Clusters 1 and 3 showed a temporal decrease in needs for RF-EMF usage activities at T2 but it returned to the baseline level 5 weeks later. Cluster 4 was less responsive to the risk communication. Subanalysis stratified by gender and age showed fluctuations in responses, especially in Clusters 1 and 2. Conclusion: We demonstrate the effectiveness of RF-EMF risk communication via websites, particularly for Cluster 2. The results of this study showed that offering objective and comprehensible information through a website can significantly reduce concerns and perceived risks related to RF-EMFs.
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.