China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Week 3
Published in Myra Hunter, Melanie Smith, Managing Hot Flushes and Night Sweats, 2020
Manage worrying thoughts – about various concerns you may have and/or about sleep: Let the thoughts (as well as the night sweats) flow over you; don’t engage with them.Use relaxation and paced breathing.Try to develop a flexible, more accepting attitude (calming), rather than one of annoyance or exasperation (restlessness).Arrange ‘worry time’ to problem solve during the daytime, for a set period.
Noise, hearing and vibration
Published in Nicholas Green, Steven Gaydos, Hutchison Ewan, Edward Nicol, Handbook of Aviation and Space Medicine, 2019
Nicholas Green, Steven Gaydos, Hutchison Ewan, Edward Nicol
Tinnitus: Perceived ringing, buzzing or hissing sound; damage to inner ear from unprotected, high-intensity noise exposure.May be temporary, serving as warning sign that overexposure has occurred; may also be permanent, with or without hearing loss.Treatment (e.g. behavioural modification, sound therapy, hearing aid usage) may decrease level of annoyance but not curative.Can be prevented by the regular use of hearing protection.
Driver Assessment and Training of the Disabled Client
Published in Raymond V. Smith, John H. Leslie, Rehabilitation Engineering, 2018
Occasionally, all of us experience annoyance, irritation, and anger because of the behavior of other drivers. These feelings (emotions) can occur only if we respond with “internal noise”. We tell ourselves something and respond to our own talk. We fail to realize that at the instant of our response the individual has almost no choice. The pressures of our genetic make-up, past experiences, covert cultural conscience, basic needs, etc. integrate to form our “attitudinal sets” which at the moment of decision, govern our response.
New determinants of mental health: the role of noise pollution. A narrative review
Published in International Review of Psychiatry, 2022
Alfonso Tortorella, Giulia Menculini, Patrizia Moretti, Luigi Attademo, Pierfrancesco Maria Balducci, Francesco Bernardini, Federica Cirimbilli, Anastasia Grazia Chieppa, Nicola Ghiandai, Andreas Erfurth
Among the included studies, 5 focussed on children populations. One study analysing possible effects of road traffic noise on sleep duration and quality in 7 year-old children demonstrated a relationship between noise pollution and the two parameters among girls (sleep duration OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04–1.41, sleep quality OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.85–2.16), but not in the overall population (Weyde et al., 2017). Road traffic noise exposure during childhood was also associated with a 7% increase of parent-reported behavioural problems, particularly concerning hyperactivity/inattention, abnormal conduct, and peer relationships (Hjortebjerg et al., 2016). In a study evaluating parent-reported noise annoyance from different sources, overall mental health problems were associated with road traffic noise, especially at night, which also influenced the emergence of emotional symptoms and conduct problems. In the same population, also noise coming from neighbours during the day showed a relevant influence on conduct problems and hyperactivity (Dreger et al., 2015). On the contrary, in a cross-sectional study conducted in The Netherlands road traffic noise was not associated with higher severity of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) symptoms and displayed a negative association with ADHD diagnosis (Zijlema et al., 2021). In a Spanish cohort study, no association was observed in children between prenatal or childhood road traffic or total noise exposure and ADHD, emotional, and aggressive disorders (Essers et al., 2022).
Subjective criteria underlying noise-tolerance in the presence of speech
Published in International Journal of Audiology, 2021
Carol L. Mackersie, Nahae Kayden Kim, Stephanie A. Lockshaw, Megan N. Nash
Taken together, these studies suggest that listeners differ in the preference and criteria used to evaluate their tolerance to noise in the presence of speech. However, the extent to which different noise-tolerance criteria are used is not yet clear. The present study examined the contributions of four noise-tolerance domains to noise-tolerance judgements in participants with normal hearing. The noise-tolerance domains of interest were loudness, annoyance, distraction, and speech interference. These were chosen because they relate to different aspects of noise reactions: sensory (loudness), emotional (annoyance), cognitive (distraction), and linguistic (speech interference). Also, there is evidence that listeners can distinguish between several of these domains including annoyance vs. loudness (Dittrich and Oberfeld 2009), annoyance versus distraction (Kjellberg et al. 1996), and loudness vs. distraction (Job 1999). Berglund, Hassmén, and Job (1996) reported that community sounds with low loudness ratings were less likely to be coupled to ratings of annoyance than were sounds with high loudness ratings. Speech interference is included as a domain because of the well-established relations between noise and speech intelligibility (Webster 1964; ANSI 1997) and because of evidence supporting the notion that speech intelligibility underlies noise tolerance for some people (e.g. Recker and Micheyl 2017).
Blur adaptation: clinical and refractive considerations
Published in Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 2020
Matthew P Cufflin, Edward Ah Mallen
Rather than using an indirect measure of blur sensitivity, Wang et al.2006 employed an ascending method of adjustment to directly determine the blur sensitivity pre‐ and post‐blur adaptation. Unlike VA, the presence of defocus reduces subjective blur sensitivity thresholds and reduces the variability of the response.1989 After positioning a target at the position of subjective best focus, myopic defocus was added at a rate of 0.1 D/sec. The observer was instructed to indicate the levels of defocus required to induce just noticeable blur, bothersome level of blur and non‐resolvable blur. The authors defined bothersome blur as where the ‘blur of the target became just bothersome or annoying to look at’. This is a highly subjective criterion, and requires the criteria of annoyance to remain constant throughout the adapting period. It was observed that following blur adaptation, the subjective sensitivity to all three levels of blur was increased for a single letter target, but not for an extract of text. It is suggested that the larger visual angle and reduction in peripheral blur sensitivity are responsible for the discrepancy between a single letter and text stimulus behaviour.2005