Next Article in Journal
Raising Children with Poor School Performance: Parenting Styles and Short- and Long-Term Consequences for Adolescent and Adult Development
Previous Article in Journal
Factors Associated with Participation of Community-Dwelling Older Adults in a Home-Based Falls Prevention Program
Reply published on 28 March 2019, see Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(7), 1105.
Comment

Comment on Gjestland, T. A Systematic Review of the Basis for WHO’s New Recommendation for Limiting Aircraft Noise Annoyance. Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. Health 2018, 15, 2717

1
Ruhr-University Bochum, Psychology Department, 44801 Bochum, Germany
2
ZEUS GmbH, Zentrum für Angewandte Psychologie, Umwelt- und Sozialforschung, Sennbrink 46, 58093 Hagen, Germany
3
Independent Researcher, 58095 Hagen, Germany
4
Federal Office for the Environment, 3003 Bern, Switzerland
5
Centre for Psychiatry, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and the London School of Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Mark Brink and Stephen A. Stansfeld were both members of the Guideline Development Group (GDG) appointed by the WHO Regional Office for Europe who published the new WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(7), 1088; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071088
Received: 11 February 2019 / Accepted: 18 March 2019 / Published: 27 March 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Environmental Health)
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. View Full-Text
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Guski, R.; Schreckenberg, D.; Schuemer, R.; Brink, M.; Stansfeld, S.A. Comment on Gjestland, T. A Systematic Review of the Basis for WHO’s New Recommendation for Limiting Aircraft Noise Annoyance. Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. Health 2018, 15, 2717. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1088. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071088

AMA Style

Guski R, Schreckenberg D, Schuemer R, Brink M, Stansfeld SA. Comment on Gjestland, T. A Systematic Review of the Basis for WHO’s New Recommendation for Limiting Aircraft Noise Annoyance. Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. Health 2018, 15, 2717. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; 16(7):1088. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071088

Chicago/Turabian Style

Guski, Rainer, Dirk Schreckenberg, Rudolf Schuemer, Mark Brink, and Stephen A. Stansfeld 2019. "Comment on Gjestland, T. A Systematic Review of the Basis for WHO’s New Recommendation for Limiting Aircraft Noise Annoyance. Int. J. Env. Res. Pub. Health 2018, 15, 2717" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 7: 1088. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071088

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop