Skip to main content
. 2022 Jul 11;130(7):076001. doi: 10.1289/EHP10197

Figure 3.

Figure 3 is a forest plot, plotting study of subgroup and odds ratio inverse variance, random, 95 percent confidence intervals year, including (bottom to top) Aircraft: Non noise specific: Total (95 percent confidence intervals), 2.30 (1.87, 2.82); Test for subgroup differences: Chi squared equals 10.85, degrees of freedom equals 1 (uppercase p equals 0.0010); I squared equals 90.8 precent. Test for overall effect: uppercase z equals 7.91 (uppercase p equals 0.00001); Heterogeneity: Tau squared equals 0.15; Chi squared equals 190.63, degrees of freedom equals 17 (uppercase p equals 0.00001); I squared equals 91 precent. Test for overall effect: uppercase z equals 2.29 (uppercase p equals 0.02); Heterogeneity: Tau squared equals 0.12; Chi squared equals 23.78, degrees of freedom equals 6 (uppercase p equals 0.0006); I squared equals 75 precent; Subtotal (95 percent confidence intervals), 1.48 [1.06, 2.06]; Nguyen and others [32], 2.74 [1.99, 3.77] 2020; Rocha and others [45], 1.49 [1.08, 2.07] 2019; Basner and others [20], 24.43 [0.38, 1582.99] 2019; Carugno and others [35], 1.40 [0.79, 2.50] 2018; Brink [55], 0.33 [0.06, 1.73] 2011; Brink and others (2001 data) [55], 1.22 [0.94, 1.58] 2005; Brink and others (2003 data) [55], 1.20 [0.92, 1.57] 2005; Aircraft: Noise specific: Test for overall effect: uppercase z equals 10.16 (uppercase p less than 0.00001); Heterogeneity: Tau squared equals 0.09; Chi squared equals 87.86, degrees of freedom equals 10 (uppercase p equals 0.0001); I squared equals 89 precent; Subtotal (95% CI), 2.84 [2.32, 3.47]; Nguyen and others [32], 6.90 [4.78, 9.96] 2020; Rocha and others [45], 3.72 [2.61, 5.31] 2019; Brink and others [46], 4.48 [3.76, 5.32] 2019; Civil Air Authority [41], 2.04 [1.47, 2.83] 2017; Yano and others [49] 2.34 [1.69, 3.24] 2015; Nguyen and others [48], 2.70 [2.13, 3.42] 2015; NORAH [42], 2.83 [2.68, 2.98] 2015; Nguyen et al. [50], 1.14 [0.69, 1.88] 2013; Nguyen and others [51, 52], 1.46 [0.99, 2.16] 2011; Schreckenberg and others [54], 2.44 [2.05, 2.91] 2009; and Nguyen and others [53], 4.65 [2.96, 7.31] 2009 (y-axis) across less disturbed, ranging from 0.05 to 0.2 in increments of 0.15 and 0.2 to 1 in increments of 0.8, and more disturbed, ranging from 1 to 5 in increments of 4 and 5 to 20 in increments of 15 (x-axis) for Risk of bias, including selection bias, exposure assessment bias, bias due to confounding, and reporting bias.

Forest plot for the odds of being highly sleep disturbed by aircraft noise per 10-dB increase in Lnight (combined estimate derived from all relevant outcomes within studies). Subgroups are presented for questions that mentioned noise as the source of the disturbance, and questions that did not specify noise as the source of the disturbance. Risk of bias: A: selection bias; B: exposure assessment; C: confounding; D: reporting bias. Green (+) denotes low risk of bias, red (–) denotes high risk of bias, yellow (?) denotes unclear risk of bias. Plots were generated using an inverse-variance (IV) random effects method across the full noise range for each individual study (not restricted to 40–65 dB Lnight). Note: CI, confidence interval; df, degrees of freedom; Lnight, nighttime noise; NORAH, Noise-Related Annoyance, Cognition and Health.