Unlike other World Health Organization evidence reviews, the systematic review on mental disorders could not provide a quantitative estimate of the effect of environmental noise. With that in mind, we aimed to update it with additional studies published through to 18 August 2019 in order to allow for a formal meta-analysis of the association of residential road traffic noise with anxiety and depression. The quality effects and random effects estimators were used for meta-analysis and the robustness of findings was tested in several sensitivity analyses. Ten studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, from which we extracted 15 estimates for depression (n = 1,201,168) and five for anxiety (n = 372,079). Almost all studies were cross-sectional and the risk of bias in them was generally high. We found 4% (95% CI: −3%, 11%) higher odds of depression and 12% (95% CI: −4%, 30%) of anxiety associated with a 10 dB(A) increase in day–evening–night noise level (L_den). Both models suffered from moderate heterogeneity (55% and 54%), but there was evidence of publication bias only in the depression model. These findings were robust with no evidence of study-level moderators. A sensitivity analysis on an alternative set of categorically-reported estimates supported a linear relationship between L_den and depression. Taking into account an overall quality assessment for the included studies, we conclude that there is evidence of “very low” quality that increasing exposure to road traffic noise may be associated with depression and anxiety.

Many countries around the world have chosen lockdown and restrictions on people’s mobility as the main strategies to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. These actions have significantly affected environmental noise and modified urban soundscapes, opening up an unprecedented opportunity for research in the field. In order to enable these investigations to be carried out in a more harmonized and consistent manner, this paper makes a proposal for a set of indicators that will enable to address the challenge from a number of different approaches. It proposes a minimum set of basic energetic indicators, and the taxonomy that will allow their communication and reporting. In addition, an extended set of descriptors is outlined which better enables the application of more novel approaches to the evaluation of the effect of this new soundscape on people’s subjective perception.

Cardiovascular effects of noise rank second in terms of disability-adjusted life year (DALYs) after annoyance. Although research during the past decade has consolidated the available data base, the most recent meta-analysis still shows wide confidence intervals - indicating imprecise information for public health risk assessment. The alpine area of Tyrol in the Austrian part of the Alps has experienced a massive increase in car and heavy goods traffic (road and rail) during the last 35 years. Over the past 25 years small-, middle-, and large-sized epidemiological health surveys have been conducted - mostly within the framework of environmental health impact assessments. By design, these studies have emphasized a contextually driven environmental stress perspective, where the adverse health effects on account of noise are studied in a broader framework of environmental health, susceptibility, and coping. Furthermore, innovative exposure assessment strategies have been implemented. This article reviews the existing knowledge from these studies over time, and presents the exposure-response curves, with and without interaction assessment, based on standardized re-analyses and discusses it in the light of past and current cardiovascular noise effects research. The findings support relevant moderation by age, gender, and family history in nearly all studies and suggest a strong need for consideration of non-linearity in the exposure-response analyses. On the other hand, air pollution has not played a relevant role as a moderator in the noise-hypertension or the noise-angina pectoris relationship. Finally, different noise modeling procedures can introduce variations in the exposure response curves, with substantive consequences for public health risk assessment of noise exposure.

Unlike the other WHO evidence reviews, the systematic review on birth outcomes could not provide a quantitative estimate of the effect of environmental noise. With that in mind, we aimed to update it with additional studies published through to 12 May, 2019 to allow for a formal meta-analysis of the association of residential road traffic noise with birth weight, low birth weight (LBW), small for gestational age (SGA), and preterm birth (PTB). The quality effects and random effects estimators were used for meta-analysis and the robustness of findings was tested in several sensitivity analyses. Nine studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, from which we extracted seven estimates for birth weight (n = 718,136 births) and LBW (n = 620,221), and five for SGA (n = 547,256) and PTB (n = 74,609). We found −8.26 g (95% CI: −20.61 g, 4.10 g) (I² = 87%) lower birth weight associated with a 10 dB(A) increase in day-evening-night noise level (L_den), and this effect became significant in sensitivity analyses. No evidence of significant effects was found for LBW (OR = 1.06; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.23) (I² = 49%), SGA (OR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.86, 1.21) (I² = 90%), or PTB (OR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.79, 1.27) (I² = 69%). The quality of evidence for continuous birth weight was graded as “moderate”, while for the other outcomes it was deemed “very low”. Finally, we discuss limitations of the risk of bias assessment criteria employed by Nieuwenhuijsen et al.

Background: Online education became mandatory for many students during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and blurred the distinction between settings where processes of stress and restoration used to take place. The lockdown also likely changed perceptions of the indoor acoustic environment (i.e., soundscape) and raised its importance. In the present study, we seek to understand how indoor soundscape related to university students’ self-rated health in Bulgaria around the time that the country was under a state of emergency declaration caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Between 17 May and 10 June 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional online survey among 323 students (median age 21 years; 31% male) from two universities in the city of Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Self-rated health (SRH) was measured with a single-item. Participants were asked how frequently they heard different types of sounds while at home and how pleasant they considered each of those sounds to be. Restorative quality of the home (the “being away” dimension of the Perceived Restorativeness Scale) was measured with a single-item. A priori confounders and effect modifiers included sociodemographics, house-related characteristics, general sensitivity to environmental influences, and mental health. Our analysis strategy involved sequential exploratory factor analysis (EFA), multivariate linear and ordinal regressions, effect modification tests, and structural equation modeling (SEM). Results: EFA supported grouping perceived sounds into three distinct factors—mechanical, human, and nature sounds. Regression analyses revealed that greater exposure to mechanical sounds was consistently associated with worse SRH, whereas no significant associations were found for human and nature sounds. In SEM, exposure to mechanical sounds related to lower restorative quality of the home, and then to poorer SRH, whereas nature sounds correlated with higher restorative quality, and in turn with better SRH. Conclusions: These findings suggest a role of positive indoor soundscape and restorative quality for promoting self-rated health in times of social distancing.