ArticleBMJ public health2024
Disability weights for environmental noise-related health states: results of a disability weights measurement study in Europe.
Article in BMJ public health, 2024. 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.
- Association between lifetime noise exposure and audiometric thresholds using the noise exposure structured interview.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Deriving disability weights for the Netherlands: findings from the Dutch disability weights measurement study.Population health metrics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Measurement of the burden of disease using disability-adjusted life years requires disability weights to quantify health losses for non-fatal consequences of disease and injury. We aimed to obtain a set of disability weights for environmental and non-environmental noise-related health states (NOISE) using a nationally representative sample survey among the general population of four European countries; and to compare the resulting NOISE disability weights with those estimated in the Global Burden of Disease 2010 (GBD 2010) and European (EURO) disability weights measurement studies. Methods: We administered a web-based survey among a cohort of individuals from Hungary, Italy, Sweden and the Netherlands. It included paired comparison questions on 82 different health states. Each respondent performed 13 paired comparison tasks. We analysed paired comparison responses with probit regression analysis, and regression results were anchored on the disability weight scale between 0 (equivalent to full health) and 1 (equivalent to death). Results: In total, 4056 respondents participated in the study. Comparison of the regression results from paired comparison responses for each country-specific dataset with those run on the pooled dataset showed high linear correlations (0.96-0.98, p<0.001). The resulting disability weights ranged from 0.005 for mild impairment of distance vision and mild anaemia to 0.761 for intensive care unit admission. The disability weight for moderate and severe annoyance was 0.006 and 0.011, respectively. Comparison of disability weights showed a higher correlation between EURO and NOISE disability weights (pseudo R-squared=0.955, Pearson correlation=0.954) compared with GBD 2010 and NOISE disability weights (pseudo R-squared=0.893, Pearson correlation=0.946). Conclusions: The NOISE disability weights are consistent and highly correlated across the four European countries. The NOISE disability weights set can be used to estimate the burden of disease attributable to noise-related outcomes across Europe.
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.