Annoyance, Sleep and Concentration Problems due to Combined Traffic Noise and the Benefit of Quiet Side

Bodin, Theo; Björk, Jonas; Ardö, Jonas; Albin, Maria · 2015 · Crossref

DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120201612

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the health impacts of combined road traffic and railway noise, specifically focusing on annoyance, sleep disturbance, and concentration problems. It also evaluates whether access to a "quiet side" of a dwelling—defined as having windows facing yards, gardens, water, or green spaces—mitigates these adverse effects. The research addresses a gap in understanding how combined noise sources compare to single sources and whether the protective effect of quiet sides persists at higher noise levels. The researchers analyzed data from 2,612 respondents aged 18–79 in Malmö, Sweden, who participated in a 2007 residential environment survey. Noise exposure was modeled using Geographic Information Systems and the Nordic prediction model, calculating 24-hour equivalent noise levels ($L_{Aeq24h}$) for road traffic, railway, and combined sources. Adverse effects were assessed via self-reported scales for annoyance, sleep quality, and concentration difficulties. Statistical analysis employed logistic regression, adjusting for confounders such as age, sex, BMI, education, economic strain, and hearing impairment. The results demonstrated a positive association between combined noise exposure and all three adverse outcomes. Crucially, access to a quiet side significantly reduced these risks. Having windows facing green space was associated with a substantially lower risk of noise annoyance (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.47) and concentration problems (OR 0.76). Specifically, having a bedroom window facing green space reduced the risk of poor sleep quality (OR 0.78). The benefit of the quiet side was sustained across all noise exposure levels, with no significant interaction between noise level and quiet side access. Regarding noise sources, railway noise was associated with significantly lower annoyance than road traffic noise at intermediate levels (45–54 dB(A)), supporting the "railway bonus." However, no significant difference in annoyance was found between railway and road traffic noise at levels $\ge$55 dB(A), suggesting the bonus may not be justified at higher exposures. The study concludes that access to a quiet side is a significant protective factor against noise-related health issues, effectively compensating for high noise levels at exposed façades. These findings support urban planning strategies that prioritize quiet outdoor spaces. Furthermore, the results challenge the universal application of the railway noise bonus in legislation, indicating that railway noise becomes equally annoying as road traffic noise at higher exposure levels. The authors note limitations, including reliance on self-reported outcomes and potential selection bias due to a 54% response rate, but affirm the robustness of the association between quiet sides and reduced health impacts.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• auditory