An Experimental Investigation of the Impact of Electromagnetic Radiations Emitted from Mobile Phone on General Health, pH, Flow Rate and Electrolytes Concentrations of Saliva in Female Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective was to determine the effect of mobile phone radiation on general health and electrolytes among students who use mobile phones. A questionnaire was designed and applied to 103 healthy and 36 deaf female students to select cases that meeting the inclusion criteria. For assessment of salivary parameters, the participants were classified into three groups. Group I was the control group, which included 17 deaf students. Group II was healthy students who have mobile phone for less than 5 years. Group III was healthy students who have mobile phone for 5 years or more. The results showed that the participants who use mobile phone had several problems in their health including dry mouth, bad odor from mouth, drooling of saliva, as well as ear and eye pain. The participants who use mobile phone complained of headache, anxiety and forgetfulness as compared to deaf participants. The study showed that there was no significant difference between pH and flow rate of saliva in all tested groups. This study has also shown that salivary level of Na+ and K+ were significantly lower in mobile phone users when compared to non-users of mobile phone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".