ArticleCurrent epidemiology reports2018
Aviation Noise and Cardiovascular Health in the United States: a Review of the Evidence and Recommendations for Research Direction.
Article in Current epidemiology reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term nighttime aircraft noise exposure and risk of hypertension in a prospective cohort of female nurses.International journal of hygiene and environmental health · 2025Article
- Noise annoyance and cardiovascular disease risk: results from a 10-year follow-up study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cardiovascular Mortality and Leaded Aviation Fuel: Evidence from Piston-Engine Air Traffic in North Carolina.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Risk of cardiovascular mortality, stroke and coronary heart mortality associated with aircraft noise around Congonhas airport, São Paulo, Brazil: a small-area study.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of the reviewIn the USA, there is mounting pressure on aviation operators and regulators to address concerns about community impacts of aircraft noise given increasing evidence of adverse health impacts, continuing community complaints, availability of cost-effective programs to reduce exposures to aircraft noise, and more stringent international policies. In the USA, regulation of civil aviation noise is the responsibility of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which requires a "significant body of scientific support," particularly applicable to the USA, to inform health-based policy and regulatory decisions. However, there have been very few studies investigating the relationship between noise and health in the USA and limited studies across the globe characterizing the effects of aviation noise specifically on cardiovascular health. This review focuses on recent findings on the relationship between aircraft noise and cardiovascular outcomes and directions for future research. RECENT
findingsEpidemiological studies generally report statistically significant associations between aircraft noise and adverse cardiovascular outcomes, although with limited evidence within the USA. Sleep disturbance, associated with nighttime noise, has been shown to be a risk factor for cardiovascular disease given associations with inflammatory markers and metabolic changes. Given numerous cardiovascular markers, the most appropriate choices depend on the ultimate objectives of the individual studies. SUMMARY: Given the state of the literature, future research should leverage emerging tools to estimate aviation, railway, and road traffic noise and apply noise estimates to a range of epidemiological study designs and endpoints to inform causal interpretation and help determine potential intervention strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.