Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure assessment: a pilot study on mobile phone signal strength and transmitted power levels

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology volume 31, pages 62–69 (2021)Cite this article

Abstract

In many epidemiological studies mobile phone use has been used as an exposure proxy for radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure. However, RF-EMF exposure assessment from mobile phone use is prone to measurement errors limiting epidemiological research. An often-overlooked aspect is received signal strength levels from base stations and its correlation with mobile phone transmit (Tx) power. The Qualipoc android phone is a tool that provides information on both signal strength and Tx power. The phone produces simultaneous measurements of Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI), Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP), Received Signal Code Power (RSCP), and Tx power on the 3G and 4G networks. Measurements taken in the greater Melbourne area found a wide range of signal strength levels. The correlations between multiple signal strength indicators and Tx power were assessed with strong negative correlations found for 3G and 4G data technologies (3G RSSI −0.93, RSCP −0.93; 4G RSSI −0.85, RSRP −0.87). Variations in Tx power over categorical levels of signal strength were quantified and showed large increases in Tx power as signal level decreased. Future epidemiological studies should control for signal strength or factors influencing signal strength to reduce RF-EMF exposure measurement error.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Please contact author for data requests. The data sharing should follow Monash University data sharing protocol.

References

  1. Ahlbom A, Bridges J, de Seze R, Hillert L, Juutilainen J, Mattsson MO, et al. Possible effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF) on human health–opinion of the scientific committee on emerging and newly identified health risks (SCENIHR). Toxicology. 2008;246:248–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. van Deventer E, van Rongen E, Saunders R. WHO research agenda for radiofrequency fields. Bioelectromagnetics. 2011;32:417–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Roser K, Schoeni A, Burgi A, Roosli M. Development of an RF-EMF exposure surrogate for epidemiologic research. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015;12:5634–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Abramson MJ, Benke GP, Dimitriadis C, Inyang IO, Sim MR, Wolfe RS, et al. Mobile telephone use is associated with changes in cognitive function in young adolescents. Bioelectromagnetics. 2009;30:678–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bhatt CR, Benke G, Smith CL, Redmayne M, Dimitriadis C, Dalecki A, et al. Use of mobile and cordless phones and change in cognitive function: a prospective cohort analysis of Australian primary school children. Environ Health. 2017;16:62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Redmayne M, Smith CL, Benke G, Croft RJ, Dalecki A, Dimitriadis C, et al. Use of mobile and cordless phones and cognition in Australian primary school children: a prospective cohort study. Environ Health. 2016;15:26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Roser K, Schoeni A, Roosli M. Mobile phone use, behavioural problems and concentration capacity in adolescents: a prospective study. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2016;219:759–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sadetzki S, Langer CE, Bruchim R, Kundi M, Merletti F, Vermeulen R, et al. The MOBI-Kids study protocol: challenges in assessing childhood and adolescent exposure to electromagnetic fields from wireless telecommunication technologies and possible association with brain tumor risk. Front Public Health. 2014;2:124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schoeni A, Roser K, Roosli M. Memory performance, wireless communication and exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: a prospective cohort study in adolescents. Environ Int. 2015;85:343–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Thomas S, Benke G, Dimitriadis C, Inyang I, Sim MR, Wolfe R, et al. Use of mobile phones and changes in cognitive function in adolescents. Occup Environ Med. 2010;67:861–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Cardis E, Deltour I, Vrijheid M, Combalot E, Moissonnier M, Tardy H, et al. Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study. Int J Epidemiol. 2010;39:675–94.

  12. Goedhart G, Kromhout H, Wiart J, Vermeulen R. Validating self-reported mobile phone use in adults using a newly developed smartphone application. Occup Environ Med. 2015;72:812–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Inyang I, Benke G, Morrissey J, McKenzie R, Abramson M. How well do adolescents recall use of mobile telephones? Results of a validation study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9:36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vrijheid M, Cardis E, Armstrong BK, Auvinen A, Berg G, Blaasaas KG, et al. Validation of short term recall of mobile phone use for the Interphone study. Occup Environ Med. 2006;63:237–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Brzozek C, Benke KK, Zeleke BM, Abramson MJ, Benke G. Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation and memory performance: sources of uncertainty in epidemiological cohort studies. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15: pii: E592. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15040592

  16. Lönn S, Forssén U, Vecchia P, Ahlbom A, Feychting M. Output power levels from mobile phones in different geographical areas; implications for exposure assessment. Occup Environ Med. 2004;61:769–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hillert L, Ahlbom A, Neasham D, Feychting M, Järup L, Navin R, et al. Call-related factors influencing output power from mobile phones. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2006;16:507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Persson T, Törnevik C, Larsson LE, Lovén J. Output power distributions of terminals in a 3G mobile communication network. Bioelectromagnetics. 2012;33:320–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gati A, Conil E, Wong M-F, Wiart J. Duality between uplink local and downlink whole-body exposures in operating networks. IEEE Trans Electromagn Compat. 2010;52:829–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gati A, Hadjem A, Wong M-F, Wiart J. Exposure induced by WCDMA mobiles phones in operating networks. IEEE Trans Wirel Commun. 2009;8:5723–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Joshi P, Agrawal M, Thors B, Colombi D, Kumar A, Törnevik C. Power level distributions of radio base station equipment and user devices in a 3G mobile communication network in India and the impact on assessments of realistic RF EMF exposure. IEEE Access. 2015;3:1051–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Joshi P, Colombi D, Thors B, Larsson L-E, Törnevik C. Output power levels of 4G user equipment and implications on realistic RF EMF exposure assessments. IEEE Access. 2017;5:4545–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Beekhuizen J, Vermeulen R, van Eijsden M, van Strien R, Burgi A, Loomans E, et al. Modelling indoor electromagnetic fields (EMF) from mobile phone base stations for epidemiological studies. Environ Int. 2014;67:22–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Bhatt CR, Redmayne M, Abramson MJ, Benke G. Instruments to assess and measure personal and environmental radiofrequency-electromagnetic field exposures. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2016;39:29–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lauridsen M, Rodriguez I, Mikkelsen LM, Gimenez LC, Mogensen P, eds. Verification of 3G and 4G received power measurements in a crowdsourcing Android app. 2016 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference; Doha, Qatar: IEEE; 2016. https://doi.org/10.1109/WCNC.2016.7564930

  26. Enami R, Shi Y, Rajan D, Camp J. Pre-crowdsourcing: predicting wireless propagation with phone-based channel quality measurements. Comput Commun. 2018;132:96–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lauridsen M, Kolding T, Pocovi G, Mogensen P, eds. Reducing handover outage for autonomous vehicles with LTE hybrid access. 2018 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC); Kansas City, MO, USA: IEEE; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICC.2018.8422737

  28. Alvarez A, Díaz A, Merino P, Rivas FJ eds. Field measurements of mobile services with Android smartphones. 2012 IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC); Las Vegas, NV, USA: IEEE: 2012.

  29. Welch K. Evolving cellular technologies for safer drone operation. Qualcomm, San Diego, CA, USA: Qualcomm 5G White Paper and Presentations, Tech Rep; 2016.

  30. Simpson O, Sun Y. LTE RSRP, RSRQ, RSSNR and local topography profile data for RF propagation planning and network optimization in an urban propagation environment. Data Brief. 2018;21:1724–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Beekhuizen J, Kromhout H, Burgi A, Huss A, Vermeulen R. What input data are needed to accurately model electromagnetic fields from mobile phone base stations? J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2015;25:53–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Thielens A, Van den Bossche M, Brzozek C, Bhatt CR, Abramson MJ, Benke G, et al. Representativeness and repeatability of microenvironmental personal and head exposures to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields. Environ Res. 2018;162:81–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia (grant number APP 545927).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Population Health Research on Electromagnetic Energy (PRESEE), School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia

    Christopher Brzozek, Berihun M. Zeleke, Michael J. Abramson & Geza Benke

  2. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia

    Christopher Brzozek, Berihun M. Zeleke, Michael J. Abramson & Geza Benke

  3. School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia

    Kurt K. Benke

  4. Centre for AgriBioscience, AgriBio, 5 Ring Rd, Bundoora, VIC, Australia

    Kurt K. Benke

Authors
  1. Christopher Brzozek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Berihun M. Zeleke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael J. Abramson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kurt K. Benke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Geza Benke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher Brzozek.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Michael Abramson owns a small parcel of shares in Telstra, which operates a mobile telephone network in Australia. The other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brzozek, C., Zeleke, B.M., Abramson, M.J. et al. Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure assessment: a pilot study on mobile phone signal strength and transmitted power levels. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 31, 62–69 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-019-0178-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-019-0178-6

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links