How Does Noise Annoyance Relate to Traffic Intensity?

Jerson, Tomas; Ögren, Mikael; Öhrström, Evy; Gunnarsson, Andreas

doi:10.1007/978-4-431-53927-8_38

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[ 13 ] proved problematic since they reported perceived traffic intensity. Noise exposure was heuristically imputed based on educated guess, although there are ways to estimate noise levels from the reported traffic intensity assuming that “reported annoyance is higher where the traffic intensity is higher”[ 29 ] and the frequency of extreme annoyance is overwhelmingly higher when extreme road traffic intensity is reported[ 30 ] — the percent of highly annoyed people can be converted to perceived decibels. [ 31 ] Because this study was somewhat contentiously interpreted, it received low score on this element.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term noise exposure and the risk for type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis

Dzhambov

2015

Noise Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diabetes mellitus is one of the leading causes for disability and mortality in modern societies. Apart from personal factors its incidence might be influenced by environmental risks such as air pollution and noise. This paper reports a systematic review and meta-analysis on the risk for type 2 diabetes due to long-term noise exposure. Electronic searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Internet yielded 9 relevant studies (5 for residential and 4 for occupational exposure). They were checked against a predefined list of safeguards against bias producing individual quality scores, which were then fed to MetaXL to conduct a quality effects meta-analysis. People exposed at their homes to roughly Lden > 60 dB had 22% higher risk (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-1.37) for type 2 diabetes in comparison to those exposed to Lden < 64 dB; when studies reporting contentious exposure categories were excluded, there was still 19% risk (95% CI: 1.05-1.35) for Lden = 60-70 dB versus Lden < 60 dB. In occupational environment there was not significant risk (relative risk [RR] = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.78-1.06) for < 85 dB versus >85 dB. There was no heterogeneity in the two groups (I2 = 0.00). The results should be interpreted with caution due to methodological discrepancies across the studies; however, they are indicative of the close links that noise pollution might have not only to cardiovascular diseases but to endocrine dysfunction as well.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term noise exposure and the risk for type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis

Dzhambov

2015

Noise Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

How Does Noise Annoyance Relate to Traffic Intensity?

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Long-term noise exposure and the risk for type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis

Long-term noise exposure and the risk for type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About