Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
The role of noise pollution as a risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD) is unclear, with observational studies yielding conflicting results susceptible to confounding and reverse causality. To clarify this relationship, we performed a 2-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study using summary statistics from large-scale genome-wide association studies of European populations. Genetically predicted daytime and evening noise exposure was used as an instrumental variable to assess a causal effect on AD risk. The primary analysis was conducted using the inverse-variance weighted method, with weighted median and MR-Egger methods as key sensitivity analyses. We assessed instrument validity and pleiotropy using the Cochran Q test, the MR-Egger intercept, and leave-one-out analysis. Our MR analysis found no evidence of a causal association between genetically predicted daytime noise (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.999 [0.993-1.006], P = .819) or evening noise (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.999 [0.993-1.005], P = .643) and the risk of AD. Sensitivity analyses were consistent, with no evidence of heterogeneity or directional pleiotropy. In conclusion, this study does not support a direct causal link between noise and AD. While our findings mitigate common observational biases, they do not preclude indirect mechanisms whereby noise may influence AD pathogenesis via established risk pathways, such as chronic sleep disruption and cardiovascular stress. Studies are needed to focus on disentangling these potential indirect effects.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Chen, Z.-h., Wang, L. X., Li, R., Jiang, Y.-h., Zong, G.-H., Yi, Z.-X., et al. (2026). Causality between noise pollution and Alzheimer disease: A Mendelian randomization analysis. Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000047612
Vancouver
Chen Z.-h, Wang LX, Li R, Jiang Y.-h, Zong G.-H, Yi Z.-X, et al. Causality between noise pollution and Alzheimer disease: A Mendelian randomization analysis. Medicine. 2026. doi:10.1097/md.0000000000047612. PMID: 41650091.
BibTeX
@article{chen2026-41650091,
author = {Chen, Ze-hao and Wang, Lian Xin and Li, Ran and Jiang, Yu-hang and Zong, Guan-Hua and Yi, Zong-Xi and Ren, Xin-Yu and Jia, Baohui},
title = {{Causality between noise pollution and Alzheimer disease: A Mendelian randomization analysis}},
journal = {Medicine},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.1097/md.0000000000047612},
pmid = {41650091},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000047612}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- The role of noise pollution as a risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD) is unclear, with observational studies yielding conflicting results susceptible to confounding and reverse causality.
- In conclusion, this study does not support a direct causal link between noise and AD.
- While our findings mitigate common observational biases, they do not preclude indirect mechanisms whereby noise may influence AD pathogenesis via established risk pathways, such as chronic sleep disruption and cardiovascular stress.
Why it matters
This two-sample Mendelian randomization study found no evidence of a causal association between genetically predicted daytime or evening noise exposure and Alzheimer disease risk. The authors state the findings do not support a direct causal link between noise and Alzheimer disease, though indirect mechanisms through sleep disruption or cardiovascular pathways are not ruled out.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 32/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Medicine: journal h-index 285 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 0 / 7 | Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026 |
| Impact for its field and year | 0 / 6 | Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 1 / 4 | Last-listed author Baohui Jia: h-index 13 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 0 / 3 | China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences: institution h-index 304 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41650091) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 32 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Genetics
Also in Genetics
173 studies in the library are filed under Genetics with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Genetics hub.