Is the Whole More Than the Sum of Its Parts? Health Effects of Different Types of Traffic Noise Combined.
disease risks
energetic noise addition
epidemiological risk multiplication
traffic noise
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 05 2019
13 05 2019
Historique:
received:
04
04
2019
revised:
06
05
2019
accepted:
12
05
2019
entrez:
16
5
2019
pubmed:
16
5
2019
medline:
18
12
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Many epidemiological studies find that people exposed to aircraft, road or railway traffic noise are at increased risk of illness, including cardiovascular disease (CVD) and depression. It is unclear how the combined exposure to these different types of traffic noise affects disease risks. This study addresses this question with a large secondary data-based case-control study ("NORAH disease risk study"). The Akaike information criterion (AIC) is used to compare two different models estimating the disease risks of combined traffic noise. In comparison with the conventional energetic addition of noise levels, the multiplication of CVD risks as well as depression risks reveals a considerably better model fit as expressed by much lower AIC values. This is also the case when risk differences between different types of traffic noise are taken into account by applying supplements or reductions to the single traffic noise pressure levels in order to identify the best fitting energetic addition model. As a consequence, the conventionally performed energetic addition of noise levels might considerably underestimate the health risks of combined traffic noise. Based on the NORAH disease risk study, "epidemiological risk multiplication" seems to provide a better estimate of the health risks of combined traffic noise exposures compared to energetic addition. If confirmed in further studies, these results should imply consequences for noise protection measures as well as for traffic planning.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31086115
pii: ijerph16091665
doi: 10.3390/ijerph16091665
pmc: PMC6539743
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.
Références
Environ Res. 2015 Apr;138:372-80
pubmed: 25769126
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013 Aug 30;10(9):4039-59
pubmed: 23999551
Noise Health. 2018 Jul-Aug;20(95):152-161
pubmed: 30136675
Environ Res. 2017 Jan;152:263-271
pubmed: 27816007
Environ Health Perspect. 2016 May;124(5):578-85
pubmed: 26606640
Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2019 Mar;222(2):221-229
pubmed: 30316691
Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2016 Nov;219(8):749-758
pubmed: 27667192
Psychol Med. 2019 Jan;49(1):149-161
pubmed: 29540253
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Feb 22;15(2):
pubmed: 29470452
Noise Health. 2014 Jan-Feb;16(68):1-9
pubmed: 24583674
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2016 Jun 17;113(24):407-14
pubmed: 27380755
J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Aug;116(2):949-57
pubmed: 15376661