4.3 Article

Association between Noise Annoyance and Mental Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19052696

Keywords

environmental and neighborhood noise; traffic noise; noise annoyance; mental health; depression; anxiety disorder; general mental health

Funding

  1. Public Health England [ITT4285]
  2. UK's National Institute of Health Research [NIHR200901]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Most studies on noise and mental health have focused on noise exposure rather than noise annoyance. This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest a potential link between noise annoyance and mental health problems, including depression, anxiety, and general mental health.
To date, most studies of noise and mental health have focused on noise exposure rather than noise annoyance. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether the available evidence supports an adverse association between noise annoyance and mental health problems in people. We carried out a literature search of Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and conference proceedings published between 2000 and 2022. Thirteen papers met the inclusion criteria. We conducted meta-analyses of noise annoyance in relation to depression, anxiety, and general mental health. In the meta-analyses, we found that depression was approximately 1.23 times greater in those who were highly noise-annoyed (N = 8 studies). We found an approximately 55% higher risk of anxiety (N = 6) in highly noise-annoyed people. For general mental health (N = 5), highly annoyed participants had an almost 119% increased risk of mental health problems as assessed by Short Form (SF) or General Household Questionnaires (GHQ), but with high heterogeneity and risk of publication bias. In conclusion, findings are suggestive of a potential link between noise annoyance and poorer mental health based on a small number of studies. More evidence is needed to confirm these findings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available