WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes

Introduction: Three recent systematic reviews suggested a relationship between noise exposure and adverse birth outcomes. The aim of this review was to evaluate the evidence for the World Health Organization (WHO) noise guidelines and conduct an updated systematic review of environmental noise, spec...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J., Ristovska, Gordana, Dadvand, Payam
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2017
País:España
Recursos:Universitat Pompeu Fabra
Repositorio:Repositorio Digital de la UPF
OAI Identifier:oai:repositori.upf.edu:10230/60189
Acesso em linha:http://hdl.handle.net/10230/60189
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14101252
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Noise
Gestation
Pregnancy
Prematurity
Congenital anomaly
Congenital abnormality
Quality of evidence
id ES_ca2d219fb5d7e77a8a847e6cc849a732
oai_identifier_str oai:repositori.upf.edu:10230/60189
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes
title WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes
spellingShingle WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes
Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
Noise
Gestation
Pregnancy
Prematurity
Congenital anomaly
Congenital abnormality
Quality of evidence
title_short WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes
title_full WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes
title_fullStr WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes
title_full_unstemmed WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes
title_sort WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomes
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
Ristovska, Gordana
Dadvand, Payam
author Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
author_facet Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
Ristovska, Gordana
Dadvand, Payam
author_role author
author2 Ristovska, Gordana
Dadvand, Payam
author2_role author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Noise
Gestation
Pregnancy
Prematurity
Congenital anomaly
Congenital abnormality
Quality of evidence
topic Noise
Gestation
Pregnancy
Prematurity
Congenital anomaly
Congenital abnormality
Quality of evidence
description Introduction: Three recent systematic reviews suggested a relationship between noise exposure and adverse birth outcomes. The aim of this review was to evaluate the evidence for the World Health Organization (WHO) noise guidelines and conduct an updated systematic review of environmental noise, specifically aircraft and road traffic noise and birth outcomes, such as preterm birth, low birth weight, being small for gestational age and congenital malformations. Materials and methods: We reviewed again all the papers on environmental noise and birth outcomes included in the previous three systematic reviews and conducted a systematic search on noise and birth outcomes to update previous reviews. Web of Science, PubMed and Embase electronic databases were searched for papers published between June 2014 (end date of previous systematic review) and December 2016 using a list of specific search terms. Studies were also screened in the reference list of relevant reviews/articles. Further inclusion and exclusion criteria for the studies provided by the WHO expert group were applied. Risk of bias was assessed according to criteria from the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for case-control and cohort studies. Finally, we applied the GRADE principles to our systematic review in a reproducible and appropriate way for judgment about quality of evidence. Results: In total, 14 studies are included in this review, six studies on aircraft noise and birth outcomes, five studies (two with more or less the same population) on road traffic noise and birth outcomes and three related studies on total ambient noise that is likely to be mostly traffic noise that met the criteria. The number of studies on environmental noise and birth outcomes is small and the quality of evidence generally ranges from very low to low, particularly in case of the older studies. The quality is better for the more recent traffic noise and birth outcomes studies. As there were too few studies, we did not conduct meta-analyses. Discussion: This systematic review is supported by previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses that suggested that there may be some suggestive evidence for an association between environmental noise exposure and birth outcomes, although they pointed more generally to a stronger role of occupational noise exposure, which tends to be higher and last longer. Very strict criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies, performance of quality assessment for risk of bias, and finally applying GRADE principles for judgment of quality of evidence are the strengths of this review. Conclusions: We found evidence of very low quality for associations between aircraft noise and preterm birth, low birth weight and congenital anomalies, and low quality evidence for an association between road traffic noise and low birth weight, preterm birth and small for gestational age. Further high quality studies are required to establish such associations. Future studies are recommended to apply robust exposure assessment methods (e.g., modeled or measured noise levels at bedroom façade), disentangle associations for different sources of noise as well as daytime and nighttime noise, evaluate the impacts of noise evens (that stand out of the noise background), and control the analyses for confounding factors, such as socioeconomic status, lifestyle factors and other environmental factors, especially air pollution.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017
2024
2024
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10230/60189
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14101252
url http://hdl.handle.net/10230/60189
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14101252
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2017 Oct 19;14(10):1252
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv MDPI
publisher.none.fl_str_mv MDPI
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositorio Digital de la UPF
instname:Universitat Pompeu Fabra
instname_str Universitat Pompeu Fabra
reponame_str Repositorio Digital de la UPF
collection Repositorio Digital de la UPF
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869419457182433280
spelling WHO environmental noise guidelines for the European region: a systematic review on environmental noise and adverse birth outcomesNieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.Ristovska, GordanaDadvand, PayamNoiseGestationPregnancyPrematurityCongenital anomalyCongenital abnormalityQuality of evidenceIntroduction: Three recent systematic reviews suggested a relationship between noise exposure and adverse birth outcomes. The aim of this review was to evaluate the evidence for the World Health Organization (WHO) noise guidelines and conduct an updated systematic review of environmental noise, specifically aircraft and road traffic noise and birth outcomes, such as preterm birth, low birth weight, being small for gestational age and congenital malformations. Materials and methods: We reviewed again all the papers on environmental noise and birth outcomes included in the previous three systematic reviews and conducted a systematic search on noise and birth outcomes to update previous reviews. Web of Science, PubMed and Embase electronic databases were searched for papers published between June 2014 (end date of previous systematic review) and December 2016 using a list of specific search terms. Studies were also screened in the reference list of relevant reviews/articles. Further inclusion and exclusion criteria for the studies provided by the WHO expert group were applied. Risk of bias was assessed according to criteria from the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for case-control and cohort studies. Finally, we applied the GRADE principles to our systematic review in a reproducible and appropriate way for judgment about quality of evidence. Results: In total, 14 studies are included in this review, six studies on aircraft noise and birth outcomes, five studies (two with more or less the same population) on road traffic noise and birth outcomes and three related studies on total ambient noise that is likely to be mostly traffic noise that met the criteria. The number of studies on environmental noise and birth outcomes is small and the quality of evidence generally ranges from very low to low, particularly in case of the older studies. The quality is better for the more recent traffic noise and birth outcomes studies. As there were too few studies, we did not conduct meta-analyses. Discussion: This systematic review is supported by previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses that suggested that there may be some suggestive evidence for an association between environmental noise exposure and birth outcomes, although they pointed more generally to a stronger role of occupational noise exposure, which tends to be higher and last longer. Very strict criteria for inclusion and exclusion of studies, performance of quality assessment for risk of bias, and finally applying GRADE principles for judgment of quality of evidence are the strengths of this review. Conclusions: We found evidence of very low quality for associations between aircraft noise and preterm birth, low birth weight and congenital anomalies, and low quality evidence for an association between road traffic noise and low birth weight, preterm birth and small for gestational age. Further high quality studies are required to establish such associations. Future studies are recommended to apply robust exposure assessment methods (e.g., modeled or measured noise levels at bedroom façade), disentangle associations for different sources of noise as well as daytime and nighttime noise, evaluate the impacts of noise evens (that stand out of the noise background), and control the analyses for confounding factors, such as socioeconomic status, lifestyle factors and other environmental factors, especially air pollution.MDPI202420242017info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10230/60189http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14101252reponame:Repositorio Digital de la UPFinstname:Universitat Pompeu FabraInglésInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2017 Oct 19;14(10):1252© 2017 by the authors. 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/).http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:repositori.upf.edu:10230/601892026-06-12T07:21:37Z
score 15,811543

Registos relacionados