Abstract
In his recent discussion paper in this journal, Truls Gjestland attempts a “systematic review”, as he calls it, of the evidence base for aircraft noise annoyance, consolidated in a meta-analysis by Guski et al. that informed the recommended guideline value of 45 dB Lden in the recently published World Health Organization (WHO) Environmental Noise Guidelines. He questions the validity of the presented evidence, as “some of the referenced studies have not been conducted according to standardized methods, and the selection of respondents is not representative of the general airport population.” Gjestland maintains that the new WHO Guidelines are based on a questionable selection of existing aircraft noise studies. Our reply comments on the arguments of Gjestland and refutes most of his critique.
Highlights
ZEUS GmbH, Zentrum für Angewandte Psychologie, Umwelt- und Sozialforschung, Sennbrink 46, Centre for Psychiatry, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Mark Brink and Stephen A
On page 2, Gjestland [1] comments on the inclusion/exclusion of studies in the systematic review by Guski et al [2]
Public Health 2019, 16, 1088 that results from previous similar surveys at both of these airports which were excluded, were included in the analysis by Miedema & Vos for their well-known EU reference curve.”. This is an astonishing fact, given that the perception of military aircraft noise is probably difficult to describe in terms of Leq, because military airports are characterized by relatively few overflights and usually very high noise levels per event
Summary
On page 2, Gjestland [1] comments on the inclusion/exclusion of studies in the systematic review by Guski et al [2] Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1088 that results from previous similar surveys at both of these airports which were excluded, were included in the analysis by Miedema & Vos for their well-known EU reference curve.”. Public Health 2019, 16, 1088 that results from previous similar surveys at both of these airports which were excluded, were included in the analysis by Miedema & Vos for their well-known EU reference curve.” Yes, this is an astonishing fact, given that the perception of military aircraft noise is probably difficult to describe in terms of Leq , because military airports are characterized by relatively few overflights and usually very high noise levels per event. This was reason enough to exclude studies involving military aircraft noise (see Section 2.2 in our systematic review)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
