Development and evaluation of the electromagnetic hypersensitivity questionnaire

Bioelectromagnetics

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 137-151

  Eltiti, Stacy ^a   Wallace, Denise ^a   Zougkou, Konstantina ^a   Russo, Riccardo ^a   Joseph, Stephen ^b   Rasor, Paul ^a   Fox, Elaine ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

EHS Screening Tool; Electromagnetic fields; Symptom subscales

Indexed keywords

ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD EFFECTS; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS;

ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS; CONDITION; ELECTROMAGNETIC HYPERSENSITIVITY; ELECTROMAGNETIC HYPERSENSITIVITY SCREENING TOOL; GENERAL POPULATION; PILOT STUDIES; PRINCIPAL-COMPONENT ANALYSIS; SCREENING TOOL; SYMPTOM SUBSCALE; UNITED KINGDOM;

ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD; ELECTROMAGNETIC HYPERSENSITIVITY SYNDROME; EVALUATION; HUMAN; HYPERSENSITIVITY REACTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PILOT STUDY; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; QUESTIONNAIRE; RADIOSENSITIVITY; SCREENING TEST; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYMPTOM; UNITED KINGDOM; VALIDITY;

EID: 33846656567     PISSN: 01978462     EISSN: 1521186X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bem.20279     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Angus VC, Entwistle VA, Emslie MJ, Walker KA, Andrew JE. 2003. The requirement for prior consent to participate on survey response rates: a population-based survey in Grampian. BMC Health Serv Res 3:21.
2. Bergqvist U, Vogel E, editors. 1997. Possible health implications of subjective symptoms and electromagnetic fields: A report by a European group of expects for the European commission, DG V. Solna, Sweden: European Commission DG V. National Institute for Working Life.
3. Flodin U, Seneby A, Tegenfeldt C. 2000. Provocation of electric hypersensitivity under everyday conditions. Scand J Work Environ Health 26(2):93-98.
4. Goldberg D. 1978. Manual of the general health questionnaire. Windsor: NFER Publishing.
5. Hietanen M, Hämäläinen A, Husman T. 2002. Hypersensitivity symptoms associated with exposure to cellular telephones: No causal link. Bioelectromagnetics 23:264-270.
6. Hillert L, Kolmodin Hedman B, Söderman E, Arnetz RB. 1999. Hypersensitivity to electricity: Working definition and additional characterization of the syndrome. J Psychos Res 47(5):429-438.
7. Hillert L, Berglind N, Arnetz BB, Bellander T. 2002. Prevalence of self-reported hypersensitivity to electric or magnetic fields in a population-based questionnaire survey. Scand J Work Environ Health 28(1):33-41.
8. Jacoby K, Jacoby A. 2004. Epilepsy and insurance in the UK: an explatory survey of the experiences of people with epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav 5:884-893.
9. Newell CE, Rosenfield P, Harris RN. 2004. Reasons for nonresponse on U.S. Navy surveys: a closer look. Mil Psychol 16(supp 4):265-276.
10. Leitgeb N, Schröttner J. 2003. Electrosensibility and electromagnetic hypersensitivity. Bioelectromagnetics 24:387-394.
11. Levallois P. 2002. Hypersensitivity of human subjects to environmental electric and magnetic field exposure: A review of the literature. Environ Health Perspect 110(4):613-618.
12. Levallois P, Neutra R, Lee G, Hristova L. 2002. Study of self-reported hypersensitivity to electromagnetic fields in California. Environ Health Perspect 110(4):619-623.
13. Nunnaly JC. 1978. Psychometric theory, 2nd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
14. Ofcom Sitefinder. [undated]. Available from: http://www.sitefinder.radio. gov.uk/.
15. Rubin GJ, Das Munshi J, Wessely S. 2005. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: A systematic review of provocation studies. Psychosom Med 67:224-232.
16. Stevens J. 1992. Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. 1996. Using multivariate statistics, 3rd edition. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.