Multivariate Analysis of Noise, Socioeconomic and Sociodemographic Factors and Their Association with Depression on Borough Level in the City State of Hamburg, Germany

Krefis, Anne Caroline; Albrecht, Myriam; Kis, Anne; Langenbruch, Anna; Augustin, Matthias; Augustin, Jobst

doi:10.14302/issn.2476-1710.jdt-17-1564

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In two studies, the exposure considered was noise annoyance [56,57]. Several studies were discarded because they contained no useful quantitative data [24,58,59,60,61]. We dropped two studies because they were based on the same dataset of an already included study [62,63].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Road Traffic Noise Exposure and Depression/Anxiety: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Dzhambov

Lercher

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unlike other World Health Organization evidence reviews, the systematic review on mental disorders could not provide a quantitative estimate of the effect of environmental noise. With that in mind, we aimed to update it with additional studies published through to 18 August 2019 in order to allow for a formal meta-analysis of the association of residential road traffic noise with anxiety and depression. The quality effects and random effects estimators were used for meta-analysis and the robustness of findings was tested in several sensitivity analyses. Ten studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, from which we extracted 15 estimates for depression (n = 1,201,168) and five for anxiety (n = 372,079). Almost all studies were cross-sectional and the risk of bias in them was generally high. We found 4% (95% CI: −3%, 11%) higher odds of depression and 12% (95% CI: −4%, 30%) of anxiety associated with a 10 dB(A) increase in day–evening–night noise level (Lden). Both models suffered from moderate heterogeneity (55% and 54%), but there was evidence of publication bias only in the depression model. These findings were robust with no evidence of study-level moderators. A sensitivity analysis on an alternative set of categorically-reported estimates supported a linear relationship between Lden and depression. Taking into account an overall quality assessment for the included studies, we conclude that there is evidence of “very low” quality that increasing exposure to road traffic noise may be associated with depression and anxiety.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Road Traffic Noise Exposure and Depression/Anxiety: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Dzhambov

Lercher

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Exposure to aircraft noise was associated with depressive symptoms (Hiramatsu et al, 1997) but lack of association was also reported (Baudin et al, 2018;Tarnopolsky et al, 1980;Wright et al, 2018). For road traffic noise, a positive association was reported for incidence of depressive symptoms (Orban et al, 2015), and prevalent depression or antidepressant use (Krefis et al, 2017;Leijssen et al, 2019;Seidler et al, 2017;Yoshida et al, 1997), but weak or no associations were also observed (Okokon et al, 2018;Stansfeld et al, 1996;Sygna et al, 2014). Pooled estimates revealed a weak positive association of road traffic noise and depression (Dzhambov and Lercher, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Incidence of depression in relation to transportation noise exposure and noise annoyance in the SAPALDIA study

Eze

Foraster

Schaffner

et al. 2020

Environment International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prospective evidence on the risk of depression in relation to transportation noise exposure and noise annoyance is limited and mixed. We aimed to investigate the associations of long-term exposure to source-specific transportation noise and noise annoyance with incidence of depression in the SAPALDIA (Swiss cohort study on air pollution and lung and heart diseases in adults) cohort.We investigated 4,581 SAPALDIA participants without depression in the year 2001/2002. Corresponding oneyear mean road, railway and aircraft day-evening-night noise (Lden) was calculated at the most exposed façade of the participants' residential floors, and transportation noise annoyance was assessed on an 11-point scale. Incident cases of depression were identified in 2010/2011, and comprised participants reporting physician diagnosis, intake of antidepressant medication or having a short form-36 mental health score < 50. We used robust Poisson regressions to estimate the mutually adjusted relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of depression, independent of traffic-related air pollution and other potential confounders.Incidence of depression was 11 cases per 1,000 person-years. In single exposure models, we observed positive but in part, statistically non-significant associations (per 10 dB) of road traffic Lden [RR: 1.06 (0.93, 1.22)] and aircraft Lden [RR: 1.19 (0.93, 1.53)], and (per 1-point difference) of noise annoyance [RR: 1.05 (1.02, 1.08)] with depression risk. In multi-exposure model, noise annoyance effect remained unchanged, with weaker effects of road traffic Lden [(RR: 1.02 (0.89, 1.17)] and aircraft Lden [(RR: 1.17 (0.90, 1.50)]. However, there were statistically significant indirect effects of road traffic Lden [(β: 0.02 (0.01, 0.03)] and aircraft Lden [β: 0.01 (0.002, 0.02)] via noise annoyance. There were no associations with railway Lden in the single and multiexposure models [(RR both models : 0.88 (0.75, 1.03)]. We made similar findings among 2,885 non-movers, where the effect modification and cumulative risks were more distinct. Noise annoyance effect in non-movers was stronger among the insufficiently active (RR: 1.09; 95%CI: 1.02, 1.17; p interaction = 0.07) and those with daytime sleepiness [RR: 1.07 (1.02, 1.12); p interaction = 0.008]. Cumulative risks of Lden in non-movers showed additive tendencies for the linear cumulative risk [(RR per 10dB of combined sources : 1.31 (0.90, 1.91)] and the categorical cumulative risk [(RR triple-vs. zero-source ≥45 dB : 2.29 (1.02, 5.14)], and remained stable to noise annoyance.Transportation noise level and noise annoyance may jointly and independently influence the risk of depression. Combined long-term exposures to noise level seems to be most detrimental, largely acting via annoyance. The moderation of noise annoyance effect by daytime sleepiness and physical activity further

show abstract

“…Exposure to road traffic noise and aircraft noise-also dependent on social characteristics-was associated with different cardiovascular diseases [51][52][53], respiratory diseases [54,55], and depression and anxiety [56,57]. Other studies investigated exposure to air pollution and found higher risk for all causes and cardio-respiratory mortality [58][59][60][61].…”

Section: Selected Empirical Results and Research Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical Evidences for Urban Influences on Public Health in Hamburg

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the current perspectives of urban health and environmental justice research, health is the result of a combination of individual, social and environmental factors. Yet, there are only few attempts to determine their joint influence on health and well-being. Grounded in debates surrounding conceptual models and based on a data set compiled for the city of Hamburg, this paper aims to provide insights into the most important variables influencing urban health. Theoretically, we are primarily referring to the conceptual model of health-related urban well-being (UrbWellth), which systemizes urban influences in four sectors. The systematization of the conceptual model is empirically confirmed by a principal component analysis: the factors derived from the data correspond well with the deductively derived model. Additionally, a multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify the most important variables influencing the participant's self-rated health (SRH): rating of one's social network, rating of neighborhood air quality, rating of neighborhood health infrastructure, heat stress (day/outdoors), cold stress (night/indoors). When controlling for age, income and smoking behavior, these variables explain 12% of the variance of SRH. Thus, these results support the concept of UrbWellth empirically. Finally, the study design helped to identify hotspots with negative impact on SRH within the research areas.

show abstract

Multivariate Analysis of Noise, Socioeconomic and Sociodemographic Factors and Their Association with Depression on Borough Level in the City State of Hamburg, Germany

Cited by 4 publications

References 30 publications

Road Traffic Noise Exposure and Depression/Anxiety: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Road Traffic Noise Exposure and Depression/Anxiety: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Incidence of depression in relation to transportation noise exposure and noise annoyance in the SAPALDIA study

Empirical Evidences for Urban Influences on Public Health in Hamburg

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About