A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Noise Annoyance as a Determinant of Physiological Changes Linked to Disease Promotion

Emily Senerth, Tejanth Pasumarthi, Neha Tangri, Bhavya Abbi, Skye Bickett, James P. McNamee, David S. Michaud () and Rebecca L. Morgan
Additional contact information
Emily Senerth: Evidence Foundation, 17415 Shelburne Road, Cleveland Heights, OH 44118, USA
Tejanth Pasumarthi: Evidence Foundation, 17415 Shelburne Road, Cleveland Heights, OH 44118, USA
Neha Tangri: Evidence Foundation, 17415 Shelburne Road, Cleveland Heights, OH 44118, USA
Bhavya Abbi: Faculty of Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada
Skye Bickett: Evidence Foundation, 17415 Shelburne Road, Cleveland Heights, OH 44118, USA
James P. McNamee: Health Canada, Environmental and Radiation Health Sciences Directorate, Consumer & Clinical Radiation Protection Bureau, Ottawa, ON KIA ICA, Canada
David S. Michaud: Health Canada, Environmental and Radiation Health Sciences Directorate, Consumer & Clinical Radiation Protection Bureau, Ottawa, ON KIA ICA, Canada
Rebecca L. Morgan: Evidence Foundation, 17415 Shelburne Road, Cleveland Heights, OH 44118, USA

IJERPH, 2024, vol. 21, issue 7, 1-31

Abstract: This systematic review investigates the certainty of evidence (CoE) regarding noise annoyance as a determinant of biological changes known to contribute to disease development. We searched PubMed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL for English-language comparative studies conducted on humans of any age from 1 January 1940, to 28 August 2023. Further, studies that provided quantitative data on the relationship between noise annoyance and biomarkers of interest were included. Where possible, random-effects meta-analyses were used to calculate the odds ratios of noise annoyance on biomarkers and biological conditions considered to be risk factors for developing health effects. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed using the Risk of Bias of Non-randomized Studies of Exposures (ROBINS-E) instrument. The CoE for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The search identified 23 primary studies reporting on relevant biomarkers. Although some studies and pooled estimates suggest a possible association between noise annoyance and biological measures, the CoE overall is very low due to concerns with the risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision in the estimates of effects. In the context of environmental impact assessment, where guidelines aim to mitigate the prevalence of populations experiencing a high level of noise annoyance, our results suggest that such practices should be grounded in the understanding that annoyance is health-relevant because it reflects an undesirable reaction to noise, rather than a precursor to chronic physical health conditions.

Keywords: noise annoyance; biological risk factors; allostatic load; stress; disease; systematic review (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/7/956/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/7/956/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:7:p:956-:d:1440103

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().