ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Investigation of Metrics for Assessing Human Response to Drone Noise.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urban Traffic Noise Analysis Using UAV-Based Array of Microphones.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Requirements for Drone Operations to Minimise Community Noise Impact.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Novel electric air transportation is emerging as an industry that could help to improve the lives of people living in both metropolitan and rural areas through integration into infrastructure and services. However, as this new resource of accessibility increases in momentum, the need to investigate any potential adverse health impacts on the public becomes paramount. This paper details research investigating the effectiveness of available noise metrics and sound quality metrics (SQMs) for assessing perception of drone noise. A subjective experiment was undertaken to gather data on human response to a comprehensive set of drone sounds and to investigate the relationship between perceived annoyance, perceived loudness and perceived pitch and key psychoacoustic factors. Based on statistical analyses, subjective models were obtained for perceived annoyance, loudness and pitch of drone noise. These models provide understanding on key psychoacoustic features to consider in decision making in order to mitigate the impact of drone noise. For the drone sounds tested in this paper, the main contributors to perceived annoyance are perceived noise level (PNL) and sharpness; for perceived loudness are PNL and fluctuation strength; and for perceived pitch are sharpness, roughness and Aures tonality. Responses for the drone sounds tested were found to be highly sensitive to the distance between drone and receiver, measured in terms of height above ground level (HAGL). All these findings could inform the optimisation of drone operating conditions in order to mitigate community noise.
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.