MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317182281 · doi:10.1289/isee.2022.p-1070

Wireless phones and brain tumour risk in young people: results of the multi-national MOBI-Kids study

2022· article· en· W4317182281 on OpenAlexaff
Gemma Castaño‐Vinyals, S. Sadetzki, Roel Vermeulen, Franco Momoli, Michael Kundi, Franco Merletti, Myron Maslanyj, Carolina Calderón, Joe Wiart, Ae‐Kyoung Lee, Masao Taki, Malcom Sim, Bruce Armstrong, Geza Benke, Rosa Schattner, Hans‐Peter Hutter, Dan Krewski, Charmaine Mohipp, Paul Ritvo, John J. Spinelli, Brigitte Lacour, Thomas Rémen, Katja Radon, Tobias Weinmann, Eleni Petridou, Maria Moschovi, Apostolos Pourtsidis, Kyriakos Oikonomou, Prodromos Kanavidis, Evi Bouka, Rajesh Dikshit, Rajni Nagrani, Angela Chetrit, Revital Bruchim, Milena Maule, Enrica Migliore, G. Filippini, Lucia Miligi, Stefano Mattioli, Noriko Kojimahara, Naohito Yamaguchi, Mina Ha, Kyung‐Hwa Choi, Hans Kromhout, Geertje Goedhart, Andrea ’t Mannetje, Amanda Eng, Chelsea E. Langer, Juan Alguacil, Núria Aragonés, María Morales‐Suárez‐Varela, Francesc Badia, Alex Albert, Gema Carretero, Elisabeth Cardis

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaYork UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhoneMobile phoneOdds ratioEnvironmental healthDemographyTelecommunicationsComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and aim. The possibility that wireless (mobile and cordless) phone use might increase brain tumour (BT) risk, has long been a concern, particularly in young people. We studied the association between wireless phone use and subsquently radiofrequency (RF) and extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic fields (EMF) exposure) in childhood/adolescence with BT risk. Methods. MOBI-Kids, a 14-country case-control study, recruited 899 BT cases and 1910 hospital controls aged 10-24 years. Each participant answered a questionnaire on history of mobile communication devices use. Analyses were conducted both in relation to the history of use of wireless phones and to estimated RF and ELF dose from use of wireless phones (based on algorithms developed in the project), adjusting for parental education. Numerous substudies and sensitivity analyses were conducted to address potential biases. Results. Mean ages of cases and controls were 16.5 and 16.6 years, respectively. The vast majority of participants were wireless phones users, with substantial numbers of long-term (>10 years) users. Most tumours were neuroepithelial (NBT; n=671). The adjusted odds ratios (OR) of NBT appeared to decrease with increasing time since start of use of wireless phones, cumulative number of calls and cumulative call time, particularly in the 15-19 years old age group. A decreasing trend in ORs was also observed with increasing estimated cumulative RF specific energy and ELF induced current density. These decreasing trends are attributable mainly to differential recall by proxies and prodromal symptoms affecting phone use before case diagnosis. Results remain unchanged despite the large number of sensitivity analyses we conducted. Conclusions. Our study provides no evidence of a causal association between wireless phone use and brain tumours in young people. However, possible residual biases prevent us from ruling out a small increased risk. Keyworks: brain tumours, young people, wireless phones

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISEE Conference AbstractsSame topicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsFrench-language works237,207