Specific absorption rate of different phone brands and health students’ awareness, attitude, and performance towards mobile phone hazards

IF 1.3 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Health Engineering and Management Journal Pub Date : 2023-04-09 DOI:10.34172/ehem.2023.17
Hiwa Hossaini, Faranak Khodadoost, Soma Goftari
{"title":"Specific absorption rate of different phone brands and health students’ awareness, attitude, and performance towards mobile phone hazards","authors":"Hiwa Hossaini, Faranak Khodadoost, Soma Goftari","doi":"10.34172/ehem.2023.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study aimed to assess the specific absorption rate (SAR) due to the exposure to the radiations from different brands of cellphones, and to compare it with guideline values. The SAR is calculated using the mathematic equation based on the measured energy. Methods: In this regard, 204 cellphones from different brands were randomly surveyed. A questionnaire composed of demographic and self-reported questions was designed to survey the students’ awareness and attitude about cellphone brands, usage duration and observed health effects. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used for statistical analysis at frequencies of 900 and 1800 MHz and the differences between brands were assessed by the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: According to the results, it was found that 46.7% and 8.4% of people used cellphones for less than 4 and more than 12 hours per day, respectively. According to the statistical tests, students with higher talk time, sent messages, and Internet usage, and those using wireless hands-free, had the most reported symptoms of headache, tinnitus, eye burning and eyestrain, sleep disturbances, and skin color changes. Conclusion: The authors found that there was no significant difference between different brands based on the SAR values. However, Samsung and Nokia brands had the highest SAR values and ASUS brand had the lowest ones. Also, the type of game apps (online/offline) was significantly correlated with possible health effects. Therefore, regarding these cases, as well as the fact that many dangers of cellphone use are unknown, it is recommended to use cellphones cautiously.","PeriodicalId":51877,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Health Engineering and Management Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Health Engineering and Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/ehem.2023.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to assess the specific absorption rate (SAR) due to the exposure to the radiations from different brands of cellphones, and to compare it with guideline values. The SAR is calculated using the mathematic equation based on the measured energy. Methods: In this regard, 204 cellphones from different brands were randomly surveyed. A questionnaire composed of demographic and self-reported questions was designed to survey the students’ awareness and attitude about cellphone brands, usage duration and observed health effects. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used for statistical analysis at frequencies of 900 and 1800 MHz and the differences between brands were assessed by the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: According to the results, it was found that 46.7% and 8.4% of people used cellphones for less than 4 and more than 12 hours per day, respectively. According to the statistical tests, students with higher talk time, sent messages, and Internet usage, and those using wireless hands-free, had the most reported symptoms of headache, tinnitus, eye burning and eyestrain, sleep disturbances, and skin color changes. Conclusion: The authors found that there was no significant difference between different brands based on the SAR values. However, Samsung and Nokia brands had the highest SAR values and ASUS brand had the lowest ones. Also, the type of game apps (online/offline) was significantly correlated with possible health effects. Therefore, regarding these cases, as well as the fact that many dangers of cellphone use are unknown, it is recommended to use cellphones cautiously.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同手机品牌的具体吸收率与健康学生对手机危害的认知、态度和表现
背景:本研究旨在评估暴露于不同品牌手机辐射的比吸收率(SAR),并将其与指导值进行比较。利用基于测量能量的数学方程计算SAR。方法:随机抽取204部不同品牌的手机进行调查。设计了一份由人口统计学和自我报告问题组成的问卷,调查学生对手机品牌、使用时间和观察到的健康影响的意识和态度。Kolmogorov-Smirnov检验用于900和1800 MHz频率的统计分析,品牌之间的差异通过Kruskal-Wallis检验进行评估。结果:根据调查结果,46.7%和8.4%的人每天使用手机的时间分别少于4小时和超过12小时。根据统计测试,通话时间、发送信息和互联网使用率较高的学生,以及使用无线免提的学生,出现头痛、耳鸣、眼睛灼热和眼睛疲劳、睡眠障碍和肤色变化的症状最多。结论:作者发现,基于SAR值,不同品牌之间没有显著差异。然而,三星和诺基亚的SAR值最高,华硕的SAR值最低。此外,游戏应用程序的类型(在线/离线)与可能的健康影响显著相关。因此,对于这些情况,以及使用手机的许多危险性是未知的,建议谨慎使用手机。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
37.50%
发文量
17
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Two phases of online food delivery app users’ behavior in Greater Jakarta during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic: Perceptions of food safety and hygiene Feasibility of natural wastewater treatment systems and life cycle assessment (LCA) for aquatic systems Modeling the concentration of suspended particles by fuzzy inference system (FIS) and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) techniques: A case study in the metro stations Plant inoculation with Piriformospora indica fungus and additive effects of organic and inorganic Zn fertilize on decreasing the Cd concentration of the plants cultivated in the Cd-polluted soil Quantitative assessment of health, safety, and environment (HSE) resilience based on the Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in municipal solid waste management system: A case study in Tehran
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1