ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
A scoping review and evidence map of radiofrequency field exposure and genotoxicity: assessing
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.
- Exposure limits to radiofrequency EMF do not account for cancer risk or reproductive toxicity assessed from data in experimental animals.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2026Article
- U.S. policy on wireless technologies and public health protection: regulatory gaps and proposed reforms.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Studies investigating genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure (3 kHz-300 GHz) have used a wide variety of parameters, and results have been inconsistent. A systematic mapping of existing research is necessary to identify emerging patterns and to inform future research and policy. Methods: Evidence mapping was conducted using guidance from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A comprehensive search strategy was applied across multiple research databases, using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria within each knowledge domain. Quantitative aggregation using tables, graphs and heat maps was used to synthesize data according to study type, organism type, exposure level and duration, biological markers (genotoxicity, cellular stress, apoptosis), RF-EMF signal characteristics, as well as funding source to further contextualize the evidence landscape. Quality criteria were applied as part of a focused analysis to explore potential biases and their effects on outcomes. Results: Over 500 pertinent studies were identified, categorized as Conclusion: The collective evidence reveals that RF-EMF exposures may be genotoxic and could pose a cancer risk. Exposure duration and real-world signals are the most important factors influencing genotoxicity, warranting further focused research. To address potential genotoxic risks, these findings support the adoption of precautionary measures alongside existing thermal-based exposure guidelines.
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.