Severity weights for noise outcomes

This page is a variable. The page identifier is Op_en5074
Moderator:Nobody (see all) Click here to sign up.
This page is a stub. You may improve it into a full page, and then a rating bar will appear here.
Upload data

Boxes with dashed borders contain brief guidance text
for completing the entries for new variables.

Scope

For the purpose of burden-of-disease (DALY) calculations, what are the most widely accepted severity weights (or ranges thereof) for the presently known health effects of environmental noise?

Definition

Data

WHO NNGL, "p. 96" ym.

Trends / Knol: "Severe annoyance and sleep disturbance are hard to weigh, because there is little information on their relationship with quality of life measures. We have used a severity factor of 0.02, with a relatively large uncertainty interval (0.01-0.12 for annoyance, 0.01-0.10 for sleep disturbance). The minimum value (0.01) is based on De Hollander et al. (1999), who used a panel of environment-oriented physicians to attribute severity weights to various health states based on a protocol by Stouthard (1997). The maximum values (0.10 and 0.12) are based on Van Kempen (1998) who did a panel study with 13 medical experts, also based on a protocol by Stouthard. In that study, sleep disturbance and annoyance were weighted relatively high. Since the weight factors are so small, these variations have a relatively big impact on the outcomes."

annoyance

see comments above

severe 0.01 Hollander AEM de, Melse JM, Lebret E, Kramers PGN. An aggregate public health indicator to represent the impact of multiple environmental exposures. Epidemiology, vol. 10, p. 606-617, 1999.

severe 0.02 (0.01–0.12) Trends in the environmental burden of disease in the Netherlands 1980 – 2020. Anne Knol RIVM 2005.pdf

severe 0.12 Kempen EEM van. Milieu-DALY’s: zieketelast die wordt veroorzaakt door blootstelling aan milieufactoren. Ontwikkeling van wegingsfactoren voor verschillende effecten van milieuverontreiniging en een schatting van de omvang van deze effecten. Universiteit van Maastricht, scriptie, 1998.

WHO: Quantifying burden of disease from environmental noise: Second technical meeting report. Bern, Switzerland, 15 – 16 December 2005

"Page 5": Annoyance

Dutch experience of estimating DALYs for annoyance from noise was presented by Anne Knol (Netherlands). The choice of exposure-response relations and disability weight was key assumptions regarding the parameters. Exposure parameters were Ldn and Lden. Levels lower than 45 and higher than 75 dB(A) were not considered to avoid uncertainties and selection bias. A disability factor of 0.02 with a relatively large uncertainty interval (0.01-0.12) was proposed. An alternative approach would be to use survey data focusing on severe annoyance to estimate the prevalence, and use the formula for DALY estimation (DALY=Number of people highly annoyed by noise x Severity weight x Duration).

Celia Rodrigues (WHO) presented preliminary estimation of DALYs from annoyance using Eurostat survey data (2000). “Proportion of population living households considering that they suffer from noise and pollution” is available under the section “Sustainable development - Public health indicators - Health risks due to environmental conditions” in Eurostat. For conservative estimation, 15% of the above proportion was assumed to be “highly annoyed by noise” as was defined for Miedema-curve in Dutch report. No age groups were considered separately, and children were considered responding the same way as adults, the duration of annoyance was considered 1 year. It was estimated that the DALYs for high annoyance from noise is 278,174 for disability weight 0.02, 139,087 for disability weight 0.01, for 1,669,041 for disability weight 0.12. When Exposure-based approach was used, DALYs were higher, 529,299 for disability weight 0.02, 264,650 for disability weight 0.01, and 3,175,796 for disability weight 0.12. Thus, the DALYs based on the Eurostat survey were about the half of those based on noise exposure data Miedema’s exposure-response relation estimates. Possible underestimation by survey-based approach was also noticed in Dutch experience. Considering the large uncertainties in the measurement of exposure, outcome and survey methods attached, the results from survey- based and exposure-based estimation are remarkably within a small range.

sleep disturbance

see comments above

severe 0.01 Hollander AEM de, Melse JM, Lebret E, Kramers PGN. An aggregate public health indicator to represent the impact of multiple environmental exposures. Epidemiology, vol. 10, p. 606-617, 1999.

severe 0.02 (0.01–0.10) Trends in the environmental burden of disease in the Netherlands 1980 – 2020. Anne Knol RIVM 2005.pdf

severe 0.10 Kempen EEM van. Milieu-DALY’s: zieketelast die wordt veroorzaakt door blootstelling aan milieufactoren. Ontwikkeling van wegingsfactoren voor verschillende effecten van milieuverontreiniging en een schatting van de omvang van deze effecten. Universiteit van Maastricht, scriptie, 1998.

WHO: Quantifying burden of disease from environmental noise: Second technical meeting report. Bern, Switzerland, 15–16 December 2005

"Page 4": Sleep disturbance

Dutch experience of estimating DALYs for sleep disturbance from noise was summarized by Anne Knol (Netherlands). The key assumptions were on the exposure-response relations and disability weight. Exposure parameter was Lnight and levels between 45 and 65 dB(A) were considered to remove uncertainties at low-level exposure and selection bias at high-level exposure. When exposure data are not available for exposure-based estimation, an alternative approach would be to use survey data focusing on severe sleep disturbance related to noise (i.e., survey-based estimation).

Ruedi Müller-Wenk (Switzerland) presented the results from an original study on disability weight for sleep disturbance related to noise. It was questioned whether “noise-induced sleep disturbance” is compatible with “primary insomnia”. Primary insomnia is included in the global burden of disease estimation, however, it does not include insomnia from environmental factors by definition. Acknowledging this difference in the definition, a disability weight specific to noise-induced sleep disturbance was sought after. Based on consensus of the experts of Switzerland, Knoblauch/MüllerWenk proposed 0.089 (C.I. 0.060; 0.120). This value is slightly smaller than that of primary insomnia (0.089 versus 0.100), and can be used as the best estimate of disability weight for noise-induced sleep disturbance.

Celia Rodrigues (WHO) presented preliminary results of DALY estimation for noise-related sleep disturbance ... Three disability weights (0.02, 0.01, and 0.12) were considered. ...

The meeting agreed that the DALYs for noise-induced sleep disturbance will be estimated with disability weight as 0.089.

hypertension / hypertensive disease

acute myocardial infarction

Dependencies

None (generally speaking, values for severity weights may depend on the geographical area)

Unit

None (pure number).

Formula

None.

Related files

<mfanonymousfilelist></mfanonymousfilelist>

Severity weights for noise outcomes. Opasnet . [1]. Accessed 18 May 2024.