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

<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> 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 </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> 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 </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> 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 </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> 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. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> 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 </sec> <sec> <title>CLINICALTRIAL</title> PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42023475665 </sec>

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.017
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsFrench-language works237,207