Skip to main content

Table 1 Direction of bias on study outcome for each key question

From: Methodological limitations in experimental studies on symptom development in individuals with idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF) – a systematic review

Bias direction

Within domain/key question

Methodological alternatives considered a source of high risk of bias

In favour of an effect of exposure (+)

Performance bias:

- Was the level and method of blinding appropriate?

- no blinding of research personal during sessions

- insufficient removal of any clues that could reveal exposure status and no tests done to control blinding

In favour of a null result (−)

Selection bias:

- Were individuals excluded whose symptoms may be explained by somatic diseases or mental disorders?

- not sufficiently considered/not reported

- Was the contrast in the severity of symptoms between situations with/without exposure verified?

- not reported

- Were EMF exposures (type of exposure source, frequency range and exposure level) applied that individuals associate with their symptoms?

- not reported

- Were exposure durations and assessment times applied that matched the time scales for the symptoms to appear?

- not reported

- Were the symptoms registered in the trials matched with those experienced in everyday exposure situations?

- not reported

Exposure bias:

- Was the background exposure level controlled and minimized?

- not reported

- Was the exposure level controlled?

- not reported

Uncertain direction on study outcome (±)

Selection bias:

- Were the intervals between exposure sessions sufficiently long to allow for recovery and to avoid carry-over effects?

- not reported

Performance bias:

- Were biases related to sequence and period of the exposure conditions minimized (for studies with cross-over design)?

- same sequence and period of the exposure conditions for all participants or for all participants of a group

- not reported

Confounding bias:

- Were biases related to confounders and cofactors minimized (for studies comparing parallel groups of IEI-EMF participants with different exposure conditions)?

- not randomized

Attrition bias:

 

- Were biases minimized that are related to attrition and to incomplete data included in the analysis?

- high attrition/exclusion rate or incomplete data in analysis

Selective reporting bias:

 

- Was bias related to selective outcome reporting minimized?

- selective outcome reporting