MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415881150 · doi:10.2196/preprints.86479

Determining Impact of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Waves on Human Pregnancy and Teratogenicity: A Protocol for Systematic Review (Preprint)

2025· article· W4415881150 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Neni Susilaningsih, Heri Sutanto, Sunarno Sunarno

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Critical appraisalSystematic reviewData extractionPregnancyQuality of evidenceMEDLINEMeta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND The widespread use of mobile devices has resulted in a significant increase in global exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic waves (EMW). Growing evidence suggests possible biological effects of EMW on vulnerable populations, particularly pregnant women. These include miscarriage, fetal malformations, and impaired placental function. However, the current literature presents inconsistent findings, and consolidated evidence remains limited OBJECTIVE This systematic review protocol aims to synthesize and critically evaluate the teratogenic and pregnancy-related effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic wave exposure among pregnant women METHODS This protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P 2020) guidelines and has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023475665). A comprehensive literature search will be conducted across PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, SpringerLink, Wiley Online Library, and Google Scholar, without restrictions on publication year but limited to English-language studies. Eligible studies will include pregnant women exposed to EMW from mobile phones or related devices. Primary outcomes encompass pregnancy complications (e.g., miscarriage, preterm birth, stillbirth, and low birth weight) and fetal anomalies. Two independent reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS), STROBE, and JBI critical appraisal tools. Data will be synthesized qualitatively, and when appropriate, quantitatively using RevMan 5.4 or STATA software RESULTS As this is a protocol, no results are available at present. Findings will be synthesized and reported according to PRISMA 2020 standards once data extraction and analysis are completed. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review will provide consolidated evidence regarding the potential teratogenic and pregnancy-related effects of non-ionizing EMW exposure. The results are expected to guide future research, inform public health policy, and support evidence-based recommendations for safe mobile device usage during pregnancy CLINICALTRIAL PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42023475665

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)0.076
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.170
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 score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0760.170
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.015
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0960.012

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsFrench-language works237,207