ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Results of a national survey among occupational physicians to estimate the number of workers with active medical devices and their types in the context of managing electromagnetic hazards.
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. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) is almost ubiquitous: workers with Active Implantable Medical Devices (AIMD) and Active Wearable Medical Devices (AWMD) are considered at particular risk with respect to occupational risk assessment and health surveillance (HS) procedures, due to possible electromagnetic hazards resulting in interference problems. The identification of these workers is therefore fundamental for prevention purposes. Aim of the study is to provide an estimate of the proportion of workers with AIMD and AWMD, and to list the main types of devices involved. Methods: We performed an online survey among a sample of Occupational Physicians (OPs) from two Italian Regions. Results: 132 OPs responded, based their answers on a whole number of more than 200,000 workers visited within HS activities in the previous year. Our results show that the 0.8% of the working population in Italy can be estimated as "particularly at risk" for EMF exposure at the workplaces due to the presence of AIMD or AWMD. The most common AIMD resulted pacemakers and implanted cardioverter defibrillators, involving the 0.24% of the workers. Considering AWMD, the most common resulted hearing aids and hormones/drugs pumps, respectively worn by the 0.25 and the 0.17% of the working population. Discussion: It should be taken into account that potential interference problems could also occur for levels of exposure to EMFs comparable to those measurable for non-professionally exposed populations. Accordingly, the conditions of increased susceptibility to EMF hazards must be carefully considered for a proper occupational EMF risk prevention: the data presented in this work provide a solid foundation for quantifying the actual impact of workers with AIMD and AWMD in the workplaces, and the main types of devices involved.
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.