ArticleBioelectromagnetics2025
Exposure Perception and Symptom Reporting in Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance Attributed to Electromagnetic Fields Using a Co-Designed Provocation Test.
Article in Bioelectromagnetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance Attributed to Electromagnetic Fields (IEI-EMF) is a syndrome that defines people who report symptoms that they attribute to their exposure to EMF sources, without any identified underlying medical condition to explain these symptoms. To date, provocation protocols have failed to demonstrate a consistent relationship between EMF exposure and reported symptoms, raising questions among some researchers and individuals with IEI-EMF about the relevance of these protocols for studying the syndrome. To address these criticisms, a provocation protocol was co-designed in collaboration with individuals with IEI-EMF. This study presents the results of the tests, with a focus on exposure perception and symptom reporting among IEI-EMF volunteers. A total of 47 IEI-EMF volunteers were enrolled and participated in an open-field habituation session. Of these, 27 completed the first double-blind controlled exposure session, while 26 and 16 volunteers, respectively, participated in three sessions for collective analyses and 12 sessions for individual-level analyses. At the individual level, no consistent association was found between exposure perception certainty level and exposure status, except for one volunteer whose perception was mostly consistent with exposure status. Similarly, symptom reporting did not align with exposure status, except for the same volunteer, whose symptom reporting showed a borderline significant result with exposure status. However, for half of the volunteers, symptom reporting was significantly correlated with exposure perception certainty level, supporting a nocebo hypothesis. At the collective level, no consistency was observed between exposure perception certainty level, symptom reporting, and exposure status. This study discusses the conditions necessary for future provocation protocols to enhance their relevance, acceptability, and potential utility in a possible care-oriented approach. It also considers criticisms of using exposure perception and symptom reporting as outcomes in provocation protocols, despite their central role in how individuals identify themselves as individuals with IEI-EMF.
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.