Free Access
Volume 59, Number 1, January - March
Page(s) 55 - 64
Published online 15 March 2024
  • Amoon AT, Swanson J, Magnani C, Johansen C, Kheifets L. 2022. Pooled analysis of recent studies of magnetic fields and childhood leukemia. Environ Res 204(Pt A) : 111993. [Google Scholar]
  • Auvinen A, Feychting M, Ahlbom A, et al. 2019. Headache, tinnitus and hearing loss in the international Cohort Study of Mobile Phone Use and Health (COSMOS) in Sweden and Finland. Int J Epidemiol 48: 1567–1579. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Baker DW, Williams MV, Parker RM, et al. 1999. Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Educ Couns 38: 33–42. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Berg-Beckhoff G, Breckenkamp J, Kowall B, et al. 2009. Risiken elektromagnetischer Felder aus Sicht deutscher Allgemeinmediziner : Projekt: StSch4545 ; Projektabschlussbericht ; Vorhaben 3607S04545. [Google Scholar]
  • Berg-Beckhoff G, Heyer K, Kowall B, et al. (2010) The views of primary care physicians on health risks from electromagnetic fields, Dtsch Arztebl Int 107: 817–23. [Google Scholar]
  • Berg-Beckhoff G, Breckenkamp J, Larsen PV, et al. 2014. General practitioners’ knowledge and concern about electromagnetic fields. Int J Environ Res Public Health 11: 12969–12982. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Berg-Beckhoff G, Heyer K, Kowall B, et al. 2009. Wie schätzen Allgemeinmediziner die Risiken durch elektromagnetische Felder ein? Dtsch Arztebl Int 107: 817–823. [Google Scholar]
  • Birks L, Guxens M, Papadopoulou E, et al. 2017. Maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and child behavioral problems in five birth cohorts. Environ Int 104: 122–131. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Cabré-Riera A, van Wel L, Liorni I, et al. 2022. Estimated all-day and evening whole-brain radiofrequency electromagnetic fields doses, and sleep in preadolescents. Environ Res 204: 112291. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Cabré-Riera A, van Wel L, Liorni I, et al. 2021. Association between estimated whole-brain radiofrequency electromagnetic fields dose and cognitive function in preadolescents and adolescents. Int J Hyg Environ Health 231: 113659. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Castaño-Vinyals G, Sadetzki S, Vermeulen R, et al. 2021. Wireless phone use in childhood and adolescence and neuroepithelial brain tumours: Results from the international MOBI-Kids study. Environ Int 160: 107069. [Google Scholar]
  • Dieudonné M. 2020. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: a critical review of explanatory hypotheses. Environ Health 19: 48. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Durusoy R, Hassoy H, Özkurt A, et al. 2017. Mobile phone use, school electromagnetic field levels and related symptoms: a cross-sectional survey among 2150 high school students in Izmir. Environ Health 16: 51. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Eeftens M, Shen C, Sönksen J, et al. 2023. Modelling of daily radiofrequency electromagnetic field dose for a prospective adolescent cohort. Environ Int 172: 107737. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Eeftens M, Struchen B, Birks LE, et al. 2018. Personal exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields in Europe: is there a generation gap? Environ Int 121: 216–226. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Elzanaty A, Chiaraviglio L, Alouini M-S. 2021. 5G and EMF exposure: misinformation, open questions, and potential solutions. Frontn Comms Net 2. [Google Scholar]
  • Flick U. 2018. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar]
  • Frei P, Poulsen AH, Mezei G, et al. 2013. Residential distance to high-voltage power lines and risk of neurodegenerative diseases: a Danish population-based case-control study. Am J Epidemiol 177: 970–978. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Funk RHW, Fähnle M. 2021. A short review on the influence of magnetic fields on neurological diseases. Front Biosci (Schol Ed) 13: 181–189. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Götte S, Ludewig Y. 2019. Was denkt Deutschland über Strahlung? Umfrage 2019 − Vorhaben 3619 S72204. Statistisches Bundesamt 1–94. [Google Scholar]
  • Grellier J, Ravazzani P, Cardis E. 2014. Potential health impacts of residential exposures to extremely low frequency magnetic fields in Europe. Environ Int 62: 55–63. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Interphone Study Group. 2010. Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study. Int J Epidemiol 39: 675–694. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Interphone Study Group. 2011. Acoustic neuroma risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study. Cancer Epidemiol 35: 453–464. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Huss A, Röösli M. 2006. Consultations in primary care for symptoms attributed to electromagnetic fields-a survey among general practitioners. BMC Public Health 6: 267. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Huss A, Spoerri A, Egger M, et al. 2009. Residence near power lines and mortality from neurodegenerative diseases: longitudinal study of the Swiss population. Am J Epidemiol 169: 167–175. [Google Scholar]
  • Jalilian H, Eeftens M, Ziaei M, et al. 2019. Public exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields in everyday microenvironments: an updated systematic review for Europe. Environ Res 176: 108517. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Jia X, Pang Y, Liu LS. 2021. Online health information seeking behavior: a systematic review. Healthcare (Basel) 9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kheifets L, Repacholi M, Saunders R, et al. 2005. The sensitivity of children to electromagnetic fields. Pediatrics 116: e303–e313. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kowall B, Breckenkamp J, Berg-Beckhoff G. 2015. General practitioners using complementary and alternative medicine differ from general practitioners using conventional medicine in their view of the risks of electromagnetic fields: a postal survey from Germany. J Family Med Prim Care 6: 21–28. [Google Scholar]
  • Kowall B, Breckenkamp J, Heyer K, et al. 2010. German wide cross sectional survey on health impacts of electromagnetic fields in the view of general practitioners. Int J Public Health 55: 507–512. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lambrozo J, Souques M, Bourg F, et al. 2013. Les médecins généralistes français face aux champs électromagnétiques. Presse Médicale 42: e133–e143. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Langer CE, de Llobet P, Dalmau A, et al. 2017. Patterns of cellular phone use among young people in 12 countries: implications for RF exposure. Environ Int 107: 65–74. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Leitgeb N, Schröttner J, Böhm M. 2005. Does “electromagnetic pollution” cause illness? An inquiry among Austrian general practitioners. Wien Med Wochenschr 155: 237–241. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Levin-Zamir D, Lemish D, Gofin R. 2011. Media Health Literacy (MHL): development and measurement of the concept among adolescents. Health Educ Res 26: 323–335. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Meese J, Frith J, Wilken R. 2020. COVID-19, 5G conspiracies and infrastructural futures. Media Int Austr 177: 30–46. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Meyen M, Löblich M, Pfaff-Rudiger S, et al. 2011. Qualitative Forschung in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. [Google Scholar]
  • Parker RM, Baker DW, Williams MV, et al. 1995. The test of functional health literacy in adults. J Gen Intern Med 10: 537–541. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Regrain C, Caudeville J, de Seze R, et al. 2020. Design of an integrated platform for mapping residential exposure to rf-emf sources. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Riedl D, Schüßler G. 2017. The influence of doctor-patient communication on health outcomes: a systematic review. Z Psychosom Med Psychother 63: 131–150. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Röösli M. 2008. Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure and non-specific symptoms of ill health: a systematic review. Environ Res 107: 277–287. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Röösli M, Dongus S, Jalilian H, et al. 2021. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on tinnitus, migraine and non-specific symptoms in the general and working population: a protocol for a systematic review on human observational studies. Environ Int 157: 106852. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Rossmann C, Riesmeyer C, Brew-Sam N, et al. 2019. Appropriation of mobile health for diabetes self-management: lessons from two qualitative studies. JMIR Diabetes 4: e10271. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Schardt C, Adams MB, Owens T, et al. 2007. Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 7: 16. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Schreier N, Huss A, Röösli M. 2006. The prevalence of symptoms attributed to electromagnetic field exposure: a cross-sectional representative survey in Switzerland. Soz Praventivmed 51: 202–209. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Schröttner J, Leitgeb N. 2008. Sensitivity to electricity-temporal changes in Austria. BMC Public Health 8: 310. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Slottje P, van Moorselaar I, van Strien R, et al. 2017. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) in occupational and primary health care: a nation-wide survey among general practitioners, occupational physicians and hygienists in the Netherlands. Int J Hyg Environ Health 220: 395–400. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverband Südwest. 2021. JIM-Studie 2021. Jugend, Information, Medien. from [Google Scholar]
  • Tettamanti G, Auvinen A, Åkerstedt T, et al. 2020. Long-term effect of mobile phone use on sleep quality: results from the cohort study of mobile phone use and health (COSMOS). Environ Int 140: 105687. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. 2018. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 169: 467–473. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.