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


not blind

always double blind

Type of interviews


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?)


Laterality attribution bias



Delayed interviews

for controls compared to cases

not delayed


reduced up to 40%

always near to 90%


exposed controls prevail

no selection bias


positive data ignored

no documentation bias


co-funded by MP Companies

funded only by Public Bodies