Traffic Noise and Mental Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests that traffic noise may negatively impact mental health. However, existing systematic reviews provide an incomplete overview of the effects of all traffic noise sources on mental health. We conducted a systematic literature search and summarized the evidence for road, railway, or aircraft noise-related risks of depression, anxiety, cognitive decline, and dementia among adults. We included 31 studies (26 on depression and/or anxiety disorders, 5 on dementia). The meta-analysis of five aircraft noise studies found that depression risk increased significantly by 12% per 10 dB L _DEN (Effect Size = 1.12, 95% CI 1.02–1.23). The meta-analyses of road (11 studies) and railway traffic noise (3 studies) indicated 2–3% (not statistically significant) increases in depression risk per 10 dB L _DEN. Results for road traffic noise related anxiety were similar. We did not find enough studies to meta-analyze anxiety and railway or aircraft noise, and dementia/ cognitive impairment and any traffic noise. In conclusion, aircraft noise exposure increases the risk for depression. Otherwise, we did not detect statistically significant risk increases due to road and railway traffic noise or for anxiety. More research on the association of cognitive disorders and traffic noise is required. Public policies to reduce environmental traffic noise might not only increase wellness (by reducing noise-induced annoyance), but might contribute to the prevention of depression and anxiety disorders.

Related collections

Most cited references 72

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Delay and failure in treatment seeking after first onset of mental disorders in the World Health Organization's World Mental Health Survey Initiative.

Philip Wang, Matthias Claus Angermeyer, Guilherme Borges … (2007)

Data are presented on patterns of failure and delay in making initial treatment contact after first onset of a mental disorder in 15 countries in the World Health Organization (WHO)'s World Mental Health (WMH) Surveys. Representative face-to-face household surveys were conducted among 76,012 respondents aged 18 and older in Belgium, Colombia, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, People's Republic of China (Beijing and Shanghai), Spain, and the United States. The WHO Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) was used to assess lifetime DSM-IV anxiety, mood, and substance use disorders. Ages of onset for individual disorders and ages of first treatment contact for each disorder were used to calculate the extent of failure and delay in initial help seeking. The proportion of lifetime cases making treatment contact in the year of disorder onset ranged from 0.8 to 36.4% for anxiety disorders, from 6.0 to 52.1% for mood disorders, and from 0.9 to 18.6% for substance use disorders. By 50 years, the proportion of lifetime cases making treatment contact ranged from 15.2 to 95.0% for anxiety disorders, from 7.9 to 98.6% for mood disorders, and from 19.8 to 86.1% for substance use disorders. Median delays among cases eventually making contact ranged from 3.0 to 30.0 years for anxiety disorders, from 1.0 to 14.0 years for mood disorders, and from 6.0 to 18.0 years for substance use disorders. Failure and delays in treatment seeking were generally greater in developing countries, older cohorts, men, and cases with earlier ages of onset. These results show that failure and delays in initial help seeking are pervasive problems worldwide. Interventions to ensure prompt initial treatment contacts are needed to reduce the global burdens and hazards of untreated mental disorders.

0 comments Cited 152 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project: an epidemiological basis for informing mental health policies in Europe.

J. Alonso, M.C. Angermeyer, J.P. Lépine (2004)

0 comments Cited 136 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: A Systematic Review on Environmental Noise and Annoyance

Rainer Guski, Dirk Schreckenberg, Rudolf Schuemer (2017)

Background: This paper describes a systematic review and meta-analyses on effects of environmental noise on annoyance. The noise sources include aircraft, road, and rail transportation noise as well as wind turbines and noise source combinations. Objectives: Update knowledge about effects of environmental noise on people living in the vicinity of noise sources. Methods: Eligible were published studies (2000–2014) providing comparable acoustical and social survey data including exposure-response functions between standard indicators of noise exposure and standard annoyance responses. The systematic literature search in 20 data bases resulted in 62 studies, of which 57 were used for quantitative meta-analyses. By means of questionnaires sent to the study authors, additional study data were obtained. Risk of bias was assessed by means of study characteristics for individual studies and by funnel plots to assess the risk of publication bias. Main Results: Tentative exposure-response relations for percent highly annoyed residents (%HA) in relation to noise levels for aircraft, road, rail, wind turbine and noise source combinations are presented as well as meta-analyses of correlations between noise levels and annoyance raw scores, and the OR for increase of %HA with increasing noise levels. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE terminology. The evidence of exposure-response relations between noise levels and %HA is moderate (aircraft and railway) or low (road traffic and wind turbines). The evidence of correlations between noise levels and annoyance raw scores is high (aircraft and railway) or moderate (road traffic and wind turbines). The evidence of ORs representing the %HA increase by a certain noise level increase is moderate (aircraft noise), moderate/high (road and railway traffic), and low (wind turbines). Strengths and Limitations: The strength of the evidence is seen in the large total sample size encompassing the included studies (e.g., 18,947 participants in aircraft noise studies). Main limitations are due to the variance in the definition of noise levels and %HA. Interpretation: The increase of %HA in newer studies of aircraft, road and railway noise at comparable L den levels of earlier studies point to the necessity of adjusting noise limit recommendations. Funding: The review was funded by WHO Europe.

0 comments Cited 120 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Int J Environ Res Public Health

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Int J Environ Res Public Health

Journal ID (publisher-id): ijerph

Title: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Publisher: MDPI

ISSN (Print): 1661-7827

ISSN (Electronic): 1660-4601

Publication date (Electronic): 25 August 2020

Publication date (Print): September 2020

Volume: 17

Issue: 17

Electronic Location Identifier: 6175

Affiliations

[1 ]Institute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany; janice.hegewald@ 123456tu-dresden.de (J.H.); melanie.schubert@ 123456tu-dresden.de (M.S.); alice.freiberg@ 123456tu-dresden.de (A.F.); karla.romero_starke@ 123456tu-dresden.de (K.R.S.); franzi_augustin@ 123456web.de (F.A.)

[2 ]Institute of Sociology, Faculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Chemnitz University of Technology, Thüringer Weg 9, 09126 Chemnitz, Germany

[3 ]Institute for Social Medicine, Occupational Medicine and Public Health, University of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany; Steffi.Riedel-Heller@ 123456medizin.uni-leipzig.de

[4 ]Department of Prevention and Evaluation, Leibniz-Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology—BIPS, 28359 Bremen, Germany; zeeb@ 123456bips.uni-bremen.de

[5 ]Health Sciences, University of Bremen, 28359 Bremen, Germany

Author notes

[* ]Correspondence: ArbSozPH@ 123456mailbox.tu-dresden.de ; Tel.: +49-351-3177-441

[†]

Contributed equally.

Author information

Janice Hegewald https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3388-161X

Melanie Schubert https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4989-5522

Karla Romero Starke https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6614-2381

Hajo Zeeb https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7509-242X

Article

Publisher ID: ijerph-17-06175

DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17176175

PMC ID: 7503511

PubMed ID: 32854453

SO-VID: 4549cb17-964a-4f7c-9956-84cc73e5f80e

License:

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Traffic Noise and Mental Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Chinese Journal of School Health

Most cited references 72

Delay and failure in treatment seeking after first onset of mental disorders in the World Health Organization's World Mental Health Survey Initiative.

The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project: an epidemiological basis for informing mental health policies in Europe.

WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: A Systematic Review on Environmental Noise and Annoyance

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Author information

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 679

Cited by 35

Most referenced authors 1,154