MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196894266 · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2021.106806

Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) exposure on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcomes: Protocols for a systematic review of experimental studies in non-human mammals and in human sperm exposed in vitro

2021· review· en· W3196894266 on OpenAlexafffund
Francesca Pacchierotti, Lucia Ardoino, Barbara Benassi, Claudia Consales, Eugenia Cordelli, Patrizia Eleuteri, Carmela Marino, Maurizio Sciortino, Martin H. Brinkworth, Guangdi Chen, James P. McNamee, Andrew Wood, Carlijn R. Hooijmans, Rob B.M. de Vries

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment International · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
FundersHealth CanadaEuropean Neuroendocrine AssociationSwinburne University of TechnologyWorld Health Organization
KeywordsMedicineFertilityPregnancyHuman researchHuman studiesObservational studyPopulationEnvironmental healthBiologyPsychologyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (RF-EMF) at environmental level have been reported to induce adverse effects on the male reproductive system and developing embryos. However, despite the number of experiments conducted since the 1970s, the diversity of testing approaches and exposure conditions, inconsistencies among results, and dosimetric flaws have not yet permitted a solid assessment of the relationship between RF-EMF exposure and such effects, warranting a more systematic and methodologically rigorous approach to the evaluation of available data. OBJECTIVES: This study aims at evaluating the effects of RF-EMF exposure on male fertility and pregnancy outcomes by a systematic review (SR) of experimental studies, conducted in compliance with international guidelines. The evidence will be organized into three streams: 1) Studies evaluating the impact of RF-EMF on the male reproductive system of experimental mammals; 2) studies evaluating the impact of RF-EMF on human sperm exposed in vitro; 3) studies evaluating the impact of RF-EMF on adverse pregnancy, birth outcomes and delayed effects in experimental mammals exposed in utero. STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA: Eligible studies will include peer-reviewed articles reporting of original results about effects of controlled exposures to RF-EMF in the frequency range 100 kHz-300 GHz on the selected outcomes without any language or year-of-publication restrictions. Eligible studies will be retrieved by calibrated search strings applied to three electronic databases, PubMed, Scopus and EMF Portal and by manual search of the list of references of included papers and published reviews. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHOD: The internal validity of the studies will be evaluated using the Risk of Bias (RoB) Rating Tool developed by National Toxicology Program/Office of Health Assessment and Translation (NTP/OHAT) integrated with input from the SYRCLE RoB tool. Given sufficient commensurate data, meta-analyses will be performed, otherwise narrative syntheses will be produced. Finally, the certainty of the effects of RF-EMF exposure on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcomes will be established following GRADE. FUNDING: The study is financially supported by the World Health Organization. REGISTRATION: OSF Registration DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7MUS3; PROSPERO CRD42021227729, CRD42021227746.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.088
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.145
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0880.145
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.015
Bibliometrics0.0190.019
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment InternationalSame topicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsFrench-language works237,207