Skip to main content

Table 4 Errors in negative Interphone studies [4, 3655, 65, 72], and reliability of positive Hardell studies [13, 710, 64, 71, 78].

From: Mobile phones and head tumours. The discrepancies in cause-effect relationships in the epidemiological studies - how do they arise?

study, design, methods negative studies positive studies
Mobile phone use inadequate: 2-5 min/day significant: 16-32 min/day
Latency time <5% cases with latency ≥10 y >18% cases with latency ≥10 y
Cordless phone users considered unexposed considered exposed
Ipsilateral tumour latency ≥10 y for only 2% cases ≥10 y for >16% cases
Head tumours identified only gliomas, meningiomas, neuromas, parotid tumours also other head tumours types
Deceased cases not included included: proxy interviews
Interviews not blind always double blind
Type of interviews face-to-face mailed questionnaires
Time of interviews cases: during hospitalisation cases: after hospitalisation
  controls: at home controls: at home
Exposure assessment non blind interview blind questionnaire
Data processing not stated (not blind?) Blind
Laterality attribution bias present Absent
Delayed interviews for controls compared to cases not delayed
Participation reduced up to 40% always near to 90%
Selection exposed controls prevail no selection bias
Documentation positive data ignored no documentation bias
Funding co-funded by MP Companies funded only by Public Bodies