Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31092312›Full record

SynthesisDeutsches Arzteblatt international2019

The Cardiovascular Effects of Noise.

Omar Hahad, Swenja Kröller-Schön, Andreas Daiber, Thomas Münzel

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Probiotics: functional food ingredients with the potential to reduce hypertension.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Omar HahadDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz.
Swenja Kröller-Schön
Andreas Daiber
Thomas Münzel

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraffic noise can induce chronic stress reactions and thereby elevate the risk of cardiovascular disease. The responsible pathophysiological mechanisms are as yet unclear.

methodsThis review is based on publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed for epidemiological and experimental studies (2007-2018) on the relation between noise and the risk of cardiovascular disease. The search terms were "noise AND cardiovascular effects" and "noise cardiovascular effects."

resultsEpidemiological studies have shown that noise caused by air, road, and rail traffic has a dose-dependent association with elevated cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. A current meta-analysis commissioned by the World Health Organization concludes that road-traffic noise elevates the incidence of coronary heart disease by 8% per 10 dB(A) increase starting at 50 dB(A) (95% confidence interval [1,01; 1,15]). Traffic noise at night causes fragmentation of sleep, elevation of stress hormone levels, and oxidative stress. These factors can promote the development of vascular dysfunction (endothelial dysfunction) and high blood pressure, which, in turn, elevate the cardiovascular risk.

conclusionTraffic noise, and air-traffic noise in particular, is an important cardiovascular risk factor that has not been sufficiently studied to date. Preventive measures are needed to protect the population from the harmful effects of noise on health.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesHumansIncidenceNoise, TransportationRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID31092312
PMCPMC6541745

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.