↓ Skip to main content

Mobile phone radiation causes brain tumors and should be classified as a probable human carcinogen (2A) (Review)

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Oncology, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#5 of 4,338)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
77 X users
facebook
29 Facebook pages
googleplus
7 Google+ users
reddit
19 Redditors
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
213 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Mobile phone radiation causes brain tumors and should be classified as a probable human carcinogen (2A) (Review)
Published in
International Journal of Oncology, February 2015
DOI 10.3892/ijo.2015.2908
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Quickly changing technologies and intensive uses of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF)‑emitting phones pose a challenge to public health. Mobile phone users and uses and exposures to other wireless transmitting devices (WTDs) have increased in the past few years. We consider that CERENAT, a French national study, provides an important addition to the literature evaluating the use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumors. The CERENAT finding of increased risk of glioma is consistent with studies that evaluated use of mobile phones for a decade or longer and corroborate those that have shown a risk of meningioma from mobile phone use. In CERENAT, exposure to RF‑EMF from digitally enhanced cordless telephones (DECTs), used by over half the population of France during the period of this study, was not evaluated. If exposures to DECT phones could have been taken into account, the risks of glioma from mobile phone use in CERENAT are likely to be higher than published. We conclude that radiofrequency fields should be classified as a Group 2A ̔probable̓ human carcinogen under the criteria used by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (Lyon, France). Additional data should be gathered on exposures to mobile and cordless phones, other WTDs, mobile phone base stations and Wi‑Fi routers to evaluate their impact on public health. We advise that the as low as reasonable achievable (ALARA) principle be adopted for uses of this technology, while a major cross‑disciplinary effort is generated to train researchers in bioelectromagnetics and provide monitoring of potential health impacts of RF‑EMF.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 77 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 213 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 211 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 14%
Researcher 27 13%
Student > Master 26 12%
Other 18 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 7%
Other 40 19%
Unknown 58 27%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 26%
Engineering 18 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 4%
Other 47 22%
Unknown 61 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 170. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2026.
All research outputs
#297,115
of 34,294,832 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Oncology
#5
of 4,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,717
of 296,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Oncology
#1
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,294,832 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,338 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.