ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Electrohypersensitivity: what is belief and what is known?
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. 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.
- Looking for Biomarkers Which May Explain Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance Attributed to Electromagnetic Fields (IEI-EMF): Does RF-EMF Exposure Influence Salivary Cortisol Response?Bioelectromagnetics · 2025Trial
- Efficacy of cognitive and behavioral therapy (CBT) treatment for individuals living with symptoms associated with environmental factors (SAEF): protocol for a randomized controlled trial.BMC psychology · 2025Article
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
Electrohypersensitivity (EHS), or idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF), is a condition with fluid and transient symptoms associated to exposure to non-ionizing radiation by people claiming to suffer from it. However, the scientific evidence linking the exposure to the reported effects to datwe has eluded researchers, and may not even exist. In the current perspective we outline what is objectively known about EMF as the cause for EHS and what is based on anecdotal information only. We discuss why randomized provocation trials were considered the most appropriate research methodology to elucidate causal links between EMF exposure and effects in a scientifically robust manner, what the main arguments against such studies are, and whether these criticisms are valid. Finally, we synthesize the evidence and beliefs around EHS and provide future directions of research and practice.
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.