Short-Term Annoyance Due to Night-Time Road, Railway, and Air Traffic Noise: Role of the Noise Source, the Acoustical Metric, and Non-Acoustical Factors.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Weidenfeld S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8123875 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundBoth physical and psychological health outcomes have been associated with exposure to environmental noise. Noise sensitivity could have the same moderating effect on physical and psychological health outcomes related to environmental noise exposure as on annoyance but this has been little tested.MethodsA cohort of 2398 men between 45 and 59 years, the longitudinal Caerphilly Collaborative Heart Disease study, was established in 1984/88 and followed into the mid-1990s. Road traffic noise maps were assessed at baseline. Psychological ill-health was measured in phase 2 in 1984/88, phase 3 (1989/93) and phase 4 (1993/7). Ischaemic heart disease was measured in clinic at baseline and through hospital records and records of deaths during follow up. We examined the longitudinal associations between road traffic noise and ischaemic heart disease morbidity and mortality using Cox Proportional Hazard Models and psychological ill-health using Logistic Regression; we also examined whether noise sensitivity and noise annoyance might moderate these associations. We also tested if noise sensitivity and noise annoyance were longitudinal predictors of ischaemic heart disease morbidity and mortality and psychological ill-health.ResultsRoad traffic noise was not associated with ischaemic heart disease morbidity or mortality. Neither noise sensitivity nor noise annoyance moderated the effects of road traffic noise on ischaemic heart disease morbidity or mortality. High noise sensitivity was associated with lower ischaemic heart disease mortality risk (HR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.57, 0.97). Road traffic noise was associated with Phase 4 psychological ill-health but only among those exposed to 56-60dBA (fully adjusted OR = 1.82 95%CI 1.07, 3.07). Noise sensitivity moderated the association of road traffic noise exposure with psychological ill-health. High noise sensitivity was associated longitudinally with psychological ill-health at phase 3 (OR = 1.85 95%CI 1.23, 2.78) and phase 4 (OR = 1.65 95%CI 1.09, 2.50). Noise annoyance predicted psychological ill-health at phase 4 (OR = 2.47 95%CI 1.00, 6.13).ConclusionsNoise sensitivity is a specific predictor of psychological ill-health and may be part of a wider construct of environmental susceptibility. Noise sensitivity may increase the risk of psychological ill-health when exposed to road traffic noise. Noise annoyance may be a mediator of the effects of road traffic noise on psychological ill-health.
| S-EPMC7995714 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Noise Related Annoyance Cognition and Health (NORAH) research initiative is one of the most extensive studies on the physiological and psychological long-term effects of transportation noise in Europe. It includes research on the quality of life and annoyance as well as cardiovascular effects, sleep disturbance, breast cancer, blood pressure, depression and the cognitive development of children. Within the realm of the annoyance module of the study approximately 10,000 residents of the Rhine-Main district were surveyed on the combined effects of transportation noise. This included combined noise from aircraft and road traffic noise (N = 4905), or aircraft and railway noise (N = 4777). Results show that judgment of the total noise annoyance of participants was strongly determined by the sound source which was judged as more annoying (in this case aircraft noise). To a lesser extent, the average sound pressure level of the two present sources was also of relevance.
| S-EPMC5580575 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is a lack of studies assessing the exposure-response relationship between transportation noise and annoyance in North America. Our aims were to investigate the prevalence of noise annoyance induced by road traffic, trains and airplanes in relation to distance to transportation noise sources, and to total environmental noise levels in Montreal, Canada; annoyance was assessed as noise-induced disturbance. A telephone-based survey among 4336 persons aged >18 years was conducted. Exposure to total environmental noise (A-weighted outdoor noise levels-LAeq24h and day-evening-night equivalent noise levels-Lden) for each study participant was determined using a statistical noise model (land use regression-LUR) that is based on actual outdoor noise measurements. The proportion of the population annoyed by road traffic, airplane and train noise was 20.1%, 13.0% and 6.1%, respectively. As the distance to major roads, railways and the Montreal International Airport increased, the percentage of people disturbed and highly disturbed due to the corresponding traffic noise significantly decreased. When applying the statistical noise model we found a relationship between noise levels and disturbance from road traffic and total environmental noise, with Prevalence Proportion Ratios (PPR) for highly disturbed people of 1.10 (95% CI: 1.07-1.13) and 1.04 (1.02-1.06) per 1 dB(A) Lden, respectively. Our study provides the first comprehensive information on the relationship between transportation noise levels and disturbance in a Canadian city. LUR models are still in development and further studies on transportation noise induced annoyance are consequently needed, especially for sources other than road traffic.
| S-EPMC4730481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study is to compare vibration exposure to noise exposure from railway traffic in terms of equal annoyance, i.e., to determine when a certain noise level is equally annoying as a corresponding vibration velocity. Based on questionnaire data from the Train Vibration and Noise Effects (TVANE) research project from residential areas exposed to railway noise and vibration, the dose response relationship for annoyance was estimated. By comparing the relationships between exposure and annoyance for areas both with and without significant vibration exposure, the noise levels and vibration velocities that had an equal probability of causing annoyance was determined using logistic regression. The comparison gives a continuous mapping between vibration velocity in the ground and a corresponding noise level at the facade that are equally annoying. For equivalent noise level at the facade compared to maximum weighted vibration velocity in the ground the probability of annoyance is approximately 20% for 59 dB or 0.48 mm/s, and about 40% for 63 dB or 0.98 mm/s.
| S-EPMC5551243 | biostudies-other
Project description:Road traffic and related noise is a major source of annoyance and impairment to health in urban areas. Many areas exposed to road traffic noise are also exposed to rail and air traffic noise. The resulting annoyance may depend on individual/neighborhood socio-demographic factors. Nevertheless, few studies have taken into account the confounding or modifying factors in the relationship between transportation noise and annoyance due to road traffic. In this study, we address these issues by combining Geographic Information Systems and epidemiologic methods. Street network buffers with a radius of 500 m were defined around the place of residence of the 7290 participants of the RECORD Cohort in Ile-de-France. Estimated outdoor traffic noise levels (road, rail, and air separately) were assessed at each place of residence and in each of these buffers. Higher levels of exposure to noise were documented in low educated neighborhoods. Multilevel logistic regression models documented positive associations between road traffic noise and annoyance due to road traffic, after adjusting for individual/neighborhood socioeconomic conditions. There was no evidence that the association was of different magnitude when noise was measured at the place of residence or in the residential neighborhood. However, the strength of the association between neighborhood noise exposure and annoyance increased when considering a higher percentile in the distribution of noise in each neighborhood. Road traffic noise estimated at the place of residence and road traffic noise in the residential neighborhood (75th percentile) were independently associated with annoyance, when adjusted for each other. Interactions of effects indicated that the relationship between road traffic noise exposure in the residential neighborhood and annoyance was stronger in affluent and high educated neighborhoods. Overall, our findings suggest that it is useful to take into account (i) the exposure to transportation noise in the residential neighborhood rather than only at the residence, (ii) different percentiles of noise exposure in the residential neighborhood, and (iii) the socioeconomic characteristics of the residential neighborhood to explain variations in annoyance due to road traffic in the neighborhood.
| S-EPMC3850497 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The detrimental effects of traffic noise on cognition in children are well documented. Not much is known about the health effects in adults. We investigated the association of residential exposure to road traffic noise and annoyance due to road traffic noise with cognitive function in a cohort of 288 elderly women from the longitudinal Study on the influence of Air pollution on Lung function, Inflammation and Aging (SALIA) in Germany. Residential noise levels-weighted 24-h mean (LDEN) and nighttime noise (LNIGHT)-were modeled for the most exposed facade of dwellings and dichotomized at ≥50 dB(A). Traffic noise annoyance (day and night) was estimated by questionnaire. Cognitive function was assessed using the Consortium to Establish a Registry on Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD-Plus) Neuropsychological Assessment Battery. The modeled noise levels were associated with impaired total cognition and the constructional praxis domain, independently of air pollution. Self-reported noise annoyance was associated with better performance in semantic memory and constructional praxis domains. This finding should be interpreted with caution since we could not control for potential confounding by hearing loss. Noise levels and annoyance were associated, but their health effects seemed mutually independent.
| S-EPMC6572214 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Noise legislation in Austria does not provide an assessment of the cumulative effect of noise from different sources. The desire of citizens for a total noise assessment is getting stronger. Within the pilot project "Gesamtlärmbetrachtung" (Total Noise Investigation) Innsbruck, data from 1031 face-to-face interviews were correlated with exposure data from road, rail and air traffic noise. The interviews were selected in clusters according to the exposure combinations of these three sources. In addition to exposure-response relationships, it has also been found that the annoyance response to air and rail traffic noise is independent of the background noise from road traffic. The total noise annoyance response shows a cumulative effect in each source considered. From the source specific exposure-response relationships, a total noise assessment model based on the annoyance equivalents model was developed. This model is more suitable than the dominant source model and thus also considerable for legal application.
| S-EPMC6766025 | biostudies-literature
Project description:An increasing number of children are exposed to road traffic noise levels that may lead to adverse effects on health and daily functioning. Childhood is a period of intense growth and brain maturation, and children may therefore be especially vulnerable to road traffic noise. The objective of the present study was to examine whether road traffic noise was associated with reported inattention symptoms in children, and whether this association was mediated by sleep duration.This study was based on the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study conducted by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Parental reports of children's inattention at age 8 were linked to modelled levels of residential road traffic noise. We investigated the association between inattention and noise exposure during pregnancy (n = 1934), noise exposure averaged over 5 years (age 3 to 8 years; n = 1384) and noise exposure at age 8 years (n = 1384), using fractional logit response models. The participants were children from Oslo, Norway.An association with inattention at age 8 years was found for road traffic noise exposure at age 8 years (coef = .0083, CI = [.0012, .0154]; 1.2% point increase in inattention score per 10 dB increase in noise level), road traffic noise exposure average for the last 5 years (coef = .0090, CI = [.0016, .0164]; 1.3% point increase/10 dB), and for pregnancy road traffic noise exposure for boys (coef = .0091, CI = [.0010, .0171]), but not girls (coef = -.0021, CI = [-.0094, .0053]). Criteria for doing mediation analyses were not fulfilled.Results indicate that road traffic noise has a negative impact on children's inattention. We found no mediation by sleep duration.
| S-EPMC5698983 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Decades of research demonstrate that roads impact wildlife and suggest traffic noise as a primary cause of population declines near roads. We created a "phantom road" using an array of speakers to apply traffic noise to a roadless landscape, directly testing the effect of noise alone on an entire songbird community during autumn migration. Thirty-one percent of the bird community avoided the phantom road. For individuals that stayed despite the noise, overall body condition decreased by a full SD and some species showed a change in ability to gain body condition when exposed to traffic noise during migratory stopover. We conducted complementary laboratory experiments that implicate foraging-vigilance behavior as one mechanism driving this pattern. Our results suggest that noise degrades habitat that is otherwise suitable, and that the presence of a species does not indicate the absence of an impact.
| S-EPMC4593122 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Surveys are a common way to measure annoyance due to road traffic noise, but the method has some draw-backs. Survey context, question wording and answer alternatives could affect participation and answers and could have implications when comparing studies and/or performing pooled analyses. The aim of this study was to investigate the difference in annoyance reporting due to road traffic noise in two types of surveys of which one was introduced broadly and the other with the clearly stated aim of investigating noise and health. METHODS: Data was collected from two surveys carried out in the municipality of Malmö, southern Sweden in 2007 and 2008 (n = 2612 and n = 3810). The first survey stated an aim of investigating residential environmental exposure, especially noise and health. The second survey was a broad public health survey stating a broader aim. The two surveys had comparable questions regarding noise annoyance, although one used a 5-point scale and the other a 4-point scale. We used geographic information systems (GIS) to assess the average road and railway noise (LAeq,24h) at the participants' residential address. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios for annoyance in relation to noise exposure. RESULTS: Annoyance at least once a week due to road traffic noise was significantly more prevalent in the survey investigating environment and health compared to the public health survey at levels > 45 dB(A), but not at lower exposure levels. However no differences in annoyance were found when comparing the extreme alternatives "never" and "every day". In the study investigating environment and health, "Noise sensitive" persons were more likely to readily respond to the survey and were more annoyed by road traffic noise compared to the other participants in that survey. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in annoyance reporting between the two surveys were mainly due to different scales, suggesting that extreme alternatives are to prefer before dichotomization when comparing results between the two. Although some findings suggested that noise-sensitive individuals were more likely to respond to the survey investigating noise and health, we could not find convincing evidence that contextual differences affected either answers or participation.
| S-EPMC3315434 | biostudies-literature