Evidence Foundation, 17415 Shelburne Road, Cleveland Heights, OH 44118, USA.
Faculty of Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4L8, Canada.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024 Jul 22;21(7):956. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21070956.
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.
本系统评价研究了噪声烦恼作为已知导致疾病发展的生物学变化的决定因素的证据确定性 (CoE)。我们检索了 1940 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 8 月 28 日发表的英文比较性人类研究,包括 PubMed MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane Central 和 CINAHL。此外,还纳入了提供噪声烦恼与感兴趣的生物标志物之间关系的定量数据的研究。在可能的情况下,使用随机效应荟萃分析计算噪声烦恼对被认为是健康影响发展风险因素的生物标志物和生物学状况的比值比。使用暴露的非随机研究偏倚风险 (ROBINS-E) 工具评估个别研究的偏倚风险。使用推荐评估、制定和评估 (GRADE) 方法评估每个结果的 CoE。检索确定了 23 项报告相关生物标志物的主要研究。尽管一些研究和汇总估计表明噪声烦恼与生物学测量之间可能存在关联,但由于对偏倚风险、不一致性和效应估计的不精确性的担忧,整体 CoE 非常低。在环境影响评估的背景下,指南旨在减轻经历高水平噪声烦恼的人群的流行,我们的结果表明,这种做法应该基于这样的理解,即烦恼与健康相关,因为它反映了对噪声的不良反应,而不是慢性身体健康状况的前兆。