Keshav Patel
Pronouns: he/him
Research Mentor(s): Lauren Smith
Research Mentor School/College/Department: Environmental Health Sciences / Public Health
Program: UROPF
Session: Session 4 (1:40pm – 2:30pm)
Authors: Keshav Patel, Lauren Smith, Richard Neitzel
Abstract
Background: Noise exposure is a serious environmental issue linked to various negative health outcomes, including cardiovascular diseases. This scoping review aims to summarize the current epidemiological evidence on the relationship between noise exposure and cardiovascular outcomes in humans. Methods: An experienced health sciences librarian conducted a search of PubMed, Embase, ProQuest, and Scopus for literature on the impact of noise on cardiovascular diseases. We included original research that was peer-reviewed, had only human subjects, was written in English, used doctor-diagnosed self-reported and/or measured disease outcomes, and focused on exposure-response relationships as effect estimates for measured or modeled noise on health outcomes. Animal studies, experimental studies, non-peer-reviewed manuscripts, studies written in non-English languages, studies that had self-reported noise, and studies that did not provide effect estimates for exposure on outcomes were excluded from this review. Covidence.org was used to screen, review, and perform extractions on each paper. Results/Hypothesis: Following the removal of duplicates across databases, 5865 titles and abstracts were screened for initial inclusion by two reviewers each. Currently, 513 papers require full-text review for exclusion in the extraction process. We expect to find moderate evidence of an association between noise exposure and cardiovascular disease outcomes in humans. Conclusion: Once results are found, we will be able to specifically state the overall risk between noise exposure and CVD outcomes, based on current literature, and the strength of the evidence. If the risk is high and the evidence is strong, we will recommend a solution or state a warning for society. If the risk is low or the evidence is weak, we will suggest changes to research that will improve evidence or evaluate it differently.
