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