Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Review

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Harmonizing Learning Spaces: A Comprehensive review of Environmental Factors in Italian Schools with a Focus on the Impact of Acoustics

Submitted:

31 December 2023

Posted:

02 January 2024

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
Indoor comfort is a critical determinant of the holistic educational experience, significantly influencing the well-being, concentration, and performance of students within the confines of school environments. Despite the widespread implementation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems in educational institutions, achieving satisfactory thermal conditions, acceptable acoustics, and optimal daylight levels for occupants continues to pose a considerable challenge. In this review, we specifically delves into the parameters characterizing Italian school environments, recognizing their direct impact on students’learning and concentration. The primary objectives of this review are conducting a thorough examination of the current acustic conditions in Italian schools. The initial phase of our search strategy involved retrieving data from key databases, namely, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Following the elimination of duplicate articles (n = 289), a total of 135 distinct papers remained for analysis. A critical review of the existing literature is presented based on these criteria, offering guidelines and recommendations for forthcoming studies. The critical review underscores various shortcomings in the current design, deployment, and documentation of multi-domain studies, signaling the need for enhanced quality in future research efforts.
Keywords: 
Acoustic Comfort
;  
Indoor Air Quality
;  
Thermal Comfort
;  
Ventilation
;  
Visual Comfort
;  
Heat storage
;  
ISO Standards
Subject: 
Engineering  -   Other

0. Introduction

The Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) stands as a critical determinant of the holistic educational experience, significantly influencing the well-being, concentration, and performance of students within the confines of school environments.
In the context of Italian schools, the quest for optimal IEQ is underscored by the multifaceted challenges associated with maintaining comfortable thermal conditions, acceptable acoustics, and effective natural lighting. Despite the prevalent use of Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems, achieving an ideal balance in these aspects remains an intricate task.
The refurbishment opportunities provided by climate policies require an adequate knowledge of the school building stock. Some studies emphasizing the critical need for comprehensive knowledge of the school building stock, which currently faces urgent maintenance requirements[1,2,3,4].
In[5] the research aims is to compare IAQ and thermal comfort standards (EN16798, BB101, ASHRAE 55, and 62.1) by analyzing data from northern Italian schools. Findings suggest the need to avoid inconsistencies within standards, endorse upper- and lower-bounded operative temperature scales for effective thermal comfort design, consider IAQ metrics preventing pollutant build-up, and advocate for a combined IAQ and thermal comfort analysis in standards to facilitate informed trade-off decisions encompassing IAQ, thermal comfort, and energy targets.
The goal of many studies is reducing children’s exposure to air pollutants[6,7,8,9,10].
In[11] microclimatic conditions were recorded in an Italian school and Fanger’s indexes PMV and PPD were calculated under different conditions.
Other studies addresses the challenge of ventilation in existing educational settings, focusing on indoor air quality (IAQ), comfort, and energy consumption. International standards advocate high air change rates, particularly in densely populated areas like school classrooms, to ensure an adequate supply of fresh air[12,13].
Italian schools often lack mechanical or controlled natural ventilation systems. Consequently, occupants must manually regulate air changes by opening or closing windows, leading to discomfort, poor air quality, and increased energy usage[11].
In[14] the aim is the analysis of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) conditions in a primary school in Bolzano, Italy, with a specific emphasis on thermo-hygrometric, visual, Indoor Air Quality (IAQ), and acoustic domains. The research involved a comprehensive survey within the school, incorporating measurements such as illuminance, luminance, material optical properties, air temperature, and CO2 concentration.
Poor IEQ conditions not only lead to occupant discomfort but can also result in reduced concentration and adverse health effects as demostrated in[15,16].
The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic further underscored the complexity and vulnerability of decision-making processes regarding IEQ threats in educational settings[5,7,17].
Several studies have focused on analyzing the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) within enclosed environments. This research area is particularly relevant as CO2 and VOC emissions directly impact indoor air quality, consequently influencing the health and comfort of occupants[18,19,20].
Schibuola et al.[21] involves experimenting with CO2-based ventilation control methods within the context of energy retrofitting. The focus is on assessing the feasibility and effectiveness of using carbon dioxide levels as a key parameter for regulating ventilation systems in existing structures undergoing energy-efficient upgrades. The experimental approach aims to provide insights into the potential energy savings and overall performance of such CO2-based ventilation strategies in retrofit applications
In recent years, most of the researchers have used a research approach that takes into account user preferences to assess energy saving opportunities.
In[22] the methodology consists of evaluating thermal comfort by combining the monitoring of physical environmental data through in situ measurements and subjective questionnaires to occupants. Finally, the research work presents and evaluates the results of this applied experimentation on a school building (the secondary school of Carrara) built in the 60s and located in Lucca (Italy).
Boeri et all.[23] aims to achieve a greater level of sustainability in the construction sector and has led to consider school buildings case studies perfect for testing sustainable technical solutions. The article proposes some of the most innovative case studies in Italy, highlighting criteria and strategies adopted in the design of spaces dedicated to children.
The goal is to promote sustainable design and construction strategies that combine high levels of energy efficiency, performance standards and indoor environmental quality, including innovative strategies to integrate the building and its related systems[24,25,26].
Frattari et all.[27] describes the process in the basic stages of the LEED certification and provides specific examples of working strategies that have been used on two different projects of schools and with activities targeted towards particular points on the LEED matrix. In particular the first case study is a project under the LEED New Construction v.2.2 rating system and the second is a building under the LEED for schools.
In[28] was proposes a feasibility study aimed at substantially improving the environmental quality of 14 school buildings in northern Italy, aspiring to meet the requirements for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification. The analysis encompasses both technical and economic aspects. The study demonstrates technical feasibility, with credits ranging between 42 and 54. Notably, the predominant cost—constituting 82.9% of the total—is associated with enhancing energy efficiency through retrofitting building envelopes and heating systems. The findings suggest that prioritizing sustainability is a viable strategy.
In[29] the study conducted an assessment of energy and carbon payback times, employing a life cycle analysis (LCA) approach. Additionally, the economic value of four proposed retrofits was determined using a probabilistic approach. The findings indicate that, from various perspectives, replacing windows emerges as the most cost-effective intervention among the proposed retrofits. The study underscores the importance of considering both economic and life cycle aspects in the evaluation of energy retrofits for schools.
Other aspects of the design related to thermal, acoustic, visual and air quality in different classrooms have been analysed in recent literature: in[30], the study involved the assessment of thermal comfort in 13 classrooms across four high schools in the Provincia di Torino and four medium-sized university classrooms at the Politecnico di Torino in Italy, specifically during the heating period. The research utilized both field measurements and subjective surveys conducted simultaneously during regular class sessions. The primary focus of the paper is on thermal comfort, a factor known to impact students’ performance in terms of attention, comprehension, and learning levels.
In[31] was studied the indoor and outdoor concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) in eight Italian schools, particularly those situated in highly polluted areas. Conducted between 2014 and 2015 using passive samplers during both hot and cold seasons, the research sought to provide valuable insights into air quality within sensitive indoor and outdoor environments (schools). The objective was to offer information for understanding the current air quality status and to aid territorial administrations in developing strategies to improve environmental quality.
Various field studies have explored preferences for the indoor thermal environment in relation to conditions of thermal neutrality. Preferred temperatures do not necessarily align with thermal neutrality. In Buyak et al.[32] the dynamic modeling of the energy state of a typical preschool educational facility in Kyiv, Ukraine, was conducted, considering various levels of thermal comfort in each of the zones. This analysis took into account factors such as occupants’ activity, metabolism, clothing, and other relevant parameters.
Recent field studies corroborate the same tendency outlined in [32] research and introduce additional findings[33,34,35].
Another fundamental aspect to consider is the acoustic quality of school classrooms. Several studies[24,36,37] in the literature address this issue, recognizing the importance of the acoustic environment in the educational context.
The acoustic quality of classrooms can significantly impact students’ learning, concentration, and overall well-being. An environment that is too noisy or has acoustic issues can compromise the effective transmission of information, negatively affecting teaching activities[38,39].
Aspects considered in these studies include the architectural design of classrooms[40], acoustic insulation of walls[41], the type of flooring[42] and the appropriate placement of acoustic solutions, such as sound-absorbing panels.
Ensuring good acoustic quality in classrooms becomes essential to create an optimal learning environment, infact in the last year soundscape research in indoor environments is gaining attention for its potential to contribute to the design of supportive, healthier, and more comfortable spaces[43].
Visentin et all.[44] addressed the indoor soundscape of classrooms for primary school children aged 8 to 10 years old. Utilizing questionnaires based on pictorial scales, the study explores perceived loudness and affective dimensions such as pleasantness and arousal. Both the actual soundscape and the children’s ideal soundscape are investigated. The study reveals that the most frequent sounds in classrooms come from the students themselves, including voices and movements, followed by traffic.
As a result, buildings and the technologies currently employed to regulate indoor environments are typically designed based on the assumption that indoor environmental stimuli have independent effects[41,45,46].
By identifying motivations, theoretical foundations, key methods, findings, and gaps in the field of multi-domain approaches, in[47] the critical review underscores current shortcomings, emphasizing the need for improved quality in the design and reporting of multi-domain research, ultimately aiming to integrate this knowledge into regulatory guidelines dominated by single-domain information.

0.1. Structure of the paper

In Section 1, we delineate the systematic search strategy employed to identify and select articles, elucidating the criteria utilized for processing the obtained information. Section 2 delves into the review’s findings, presenting a descriptive analysis of the identified papers. This analysis encompasses participant details, domains and tasks studied, as well as an examination of various effects. Additionally, in Section 3 we explore how each parameter type may influence environmental comfort and engages in a discussion of the impacts of noise and sound within the school environment, aligning the observations with regulatory standards. Finally, Section 4 draft the conslusion of the revision.

1. Materials and Methods

Presently, the impact of ambient noise in school classrooms is not thoroughly explored within the framework of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) parameters. Adhering to the PRISMA guidelines[48,49], we conducted a systematic review comprising 55 studies published.
Encompassing students from primary school to university levels, the selected studies examined the effects of fan noise from HVAC systems and external sounds entering classrooms when windows are open (including traffic noise, aircraft noise, railway noise, human noise, sirens, construction noise, and natural sounds).

1.1. Literature review follows the PRISMA methods

Establishing eligibility criteria is crucial for evaluating the credibility, relevance, and thoroughness of a review[50]. In particular, the exclusion criteria were intentionally structured in an incremental fashion. In practical terms, if an article did not meet the requirements of the first exclusion criterion, it was automatically excluded from consideration, and subsequent exclusion criteria were not applied.
This systematic approach ensures a clear and efficient screening process, streamlining the review’s focus on articles that align with the predefined standards from the outset, while minimizing unnecessary verification steps for articles that do not meet the initial criteria.
All the eligibility criteria divided into inclusion and exclusion criteria are summarized in Table 1.
The initial phase of our search strategy involved retrieving data from key databases, namely Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, PubMed, and Google Scholar[51]. These databases are widely acknowledged as reputable sources of high-quality publications in the fields of Physics and Engineering.
Our search began with a straightforward keyword combination representing the two primary aspects of our study, namely "Indoor Environmental Comfort" AND "HVAC Systems." However, to ensure a more exhaustive search, we expanded our query to include synonyms and related terms.
The search string was modified to be: "Indoor environmental quality" OR "IEQ" OR "Quality indoor" AND "Indoor Air Quality" OR "IAQ" AND "HVAC" OR "Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning" AND "Acoustic comfort" AND "Combined Comfort" AND "Italian school" OR "Italian educational room" OR "Italian Classroom" AND "Language".

1.2. Study selection

The papers obtained through this search were imported into Mendeley using the BibTex format. This facilitated the removal of duplicate papers, adjustments as necessary, and subsequent export to a spreadsheet for further analysis.
502 records were initially identified across the aforementioned databases. Following the elimination of duplicate articles (n = 289), a total of 213 distinct papers remained for analysis. In the subsequent phase, 1114 records were excluded based on a thorough examination of titles, keywords, and abstracts, resulting in the identification of 135 papers deemed eligible for a comprehensive review. Subsequently, a detailed full-text analysis led to the exclusion of 93 records, ultimately leaving 42 full-text papers for in-depth examination. Additionally, a manual search was conducted across various search engines and citations manually identified within the selected articles, which were not part of the original query results.
Figure 1 presents a flow diagram with a report of the outcomes obtained in each phase.

2. Results

This section presents a comprehensive synthesis of the findings derived from the inclusion of 42 studies within our review. The synthesis is structured into two distinct subsections, each aligned with a specific thematic focus:
  • Current State of Testing in Italy on Environmental Comfort Within Schools:
This subsection delves into the existing landscape of research and testing pertaining to environmental comfort within the scholastic context in Italy. It aims to provide a nuanced understanding of the ongoing efforts to assess and enhance conditions conducive to learning within educational institutions.
  • School Typology, Key Influencing Factors on Comfort, and Their Combined Effects:
In this subsection, we explore the diverse landscape of school types in Italy and delve into the principal factors influencing environmental comfort. The intricate interplay of various factors, whether in isolation or in combination, is scrutinized to unravel their collective impact on the well-being, concentration, and academic performance of students. By elucidating the intricate web of influences, this section seeks to offer a nuanced perspective on the multifaceted nature of environmental comfort within the educational milieu. This deliberate organization aims to facilitate a nuanced exploration of the multifaceted dimensions encapsulated within the broader theme of environmental comfort in Italian schools.

2.1. Synthesis of Italian classroom environment quality

Table 2 provides a comprehensive overview of the studies selected for the review. Each row in the table represents a specific study, while the columns contain relevant information such as the study title, authors, publication year, research method, and key findings or conclusions.
This table serves as a visual reference to quickly grasp the key characteristics of the studies included in the review, facilitating an overall understanding of the selected literature.

2.2. Qualitative synthesis of data

The existing literature is reviewed and analyzed by distinguishing the papers according to two domain:
  • Combined effect;
  • Only one effect.
Table 3 shows the characteristics of included studies in qualitative synthesis.

3. Analysis and discussion

Our meticulous examination has brought to light notable deficiencies in the present methodologies employed for the design, deployment, and documentation of multi-domain studies.
  • Standards and types of measures:
The first subsection meticulously elucidates the prevailing standards and diverse types of measures employed across the available articles. This scrutiny aims to bring clarity to the methodologies and metrics adopted in existing research, providing a foundation for a comprehensive understanding of the varied approaches utilized to assess multi-domain aspects within educational environments.
  • Cross-sectional summary of results:
In the second subsection, we present a cross-sectional synthesis of results obtained from the examined studies. This summary distills key findings, offering a panoramic view of outcomes across different domains. By juxtaposing and interlinking these results, we aim to unveil patterns, gaps, and potential avenues for further exploration, thereby contributing to the ongoing discourse on the quality and depth of research in this domain. This dual-sectioned approach serves to not only critique the existing state of multi-domain studies but also to provide a constructive framework for enhancing the rigor and comprehensiveness of future research initiatives.

3.1. The assessment of indoor comfort: italian regulations, monitoring and instrumentation

Recently, there has been a notable advancement in the establishment of standards that specifically focus on defining and ensuring Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ).
The main goal is to promote strategies aimed at the improvement of indoor air quality in schools, which will result in a significant health benefit for students, as well as teaching, technical and administrative staff, as highlighted in the Prime Ministerial Decree of 26 July 2022[92].
In the 2022 revision of CAM Edilizia[93], the UNI EN 16798-1[94] standard is cited as a reference for thermo-hygrometric comfort and air quality.
These standards[94,95] play a crucial role in outlining acceptable ranges for various parameters that directly impact the overall comfort and well-being of individuals within indoor spaces.
These parameters encompass a range of factors influencing indoor conditions, such as temperature, humidity, air quality, lighting, and acoustics.
The reference standards for determining the air flow are the Ministerial Decree of 18 December 1975[96] and the UNI 10339[97].
The DM 18/12/75 establishes, depending on the type of school and classroom, the value of the air exchange coefficient n, expressed in 1/h, for the calculation of the air flow to be provided to the environment concerned. This coefficient should be multiplied by the internal volume of the environment to determine the flow rate to be provided according to regulations (eq.1).
The values of the coefficient n are given in paragraph 5.3.12. of DM 18/12/75.
Indicators for assessing the indoor acoustic quality of buildings are described in Appendix C of UNI 11367:2023[98] "Indications for the assessment of the indoor acoustic characteristics of rooms" which provides the recommended values of the parameters Reverberation time, C50 and STI in relation to environments used for speech or sports activities.
The internal acoustic characteristics of confined environments are also dealt with in the UNI 11532-1[99], "Internal acoustic characteristics of confined environments-Design methods and evaluation techniques-Part 1: General requirements" and UNI 11532-2[100], "Internal acoustic characteristics of confined environments-Design methods and evaluation techniques-Part 2: School sector".
The refinement of these standards reflects an evolving understanding of the intricate interplay between environmental factors and human comfort.
By setting clear benchmarks and acceptable limits for each of these parameters, the standards aim to provide guidelines that contribute to creating indoor environments conducive to optimal comfort, health, and productivity.

3.2. Cross-sectional summary of results

A comprehensive analysis of the data collected in this review, focusing on the educational landscape of multiple institutions. A diverse range of schools have been examined:
  • Kindergarten (4): Nursery school or preschool for young children.
  • Primary School (123): Elementary school, typically covering grades from first to fifth.
  • Middle School (4): Intermediate school, generally including grades from sixth to eighth.
  • Secondary School (12): High school, encompassing grades from 9th to 12th.
  • University (44): Higher education institution offering undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral programs.
For each article, the highlighted emphasis has been placed on identifying which parameter, in accordance with Italian legal standards, was selected to evaluate comfort in schools. Specifically, the focus has been on the effects related to Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ), Indoor Air Quality (IAQ), Illumination (I), and Acoustics (A), and how these parameters have been combined.
Figure 2 presents the percentage of combined and not combined effects for the analysis.
From the figure, it is evident that only 5% of the considered studies took into account all effects when evaluating comfort in schools. Studies that also take into account only acoustics (34%), IEQ combined with lighting and acoustics (7%) do not consider air quality, and vice versa.
In recent years, there has been a growing focus from regulatory authorities on creating healthier and more comfortable school environments. Laws and regulations have been introduced with the aim of ensuring optimal conditions for the learning and work of students and staff.
During this period of regulatory change, the direct impact on research has been evident. Various research groups have felt compelled to explore a broader range of topics related to the internal comfort of schools. Moving away from monothematic approaches, research has expanded to consider elements such as air quality, lighting, and space design, thus promoting a holistic approach to well-being in schools.
In Figure 3 , it is clearly highlighted how research in this field has undergone a notable transformation over time. Initially focused on specific themes, investigations have gradually shifted towards a holistic perspective, delving into aspects such as air quality, lighting, and space design. This change has been closely guided by regulations aimed at improving environmental conditions within schools.
Observing the graph, one can grasp key trends reflecting the diversification of research topics over the years. This broader approach reflects the direct impact of regulations, which have stimulated a more comprehensive and in-depth perspective on well-being in schools.
As we closely examine the evolution of research on the environmental quality in schools, it’s worth noting that one of the emerging areas of interest is acoustics.
It is noteworthy that a predominant majority of studies selected for this review seem to concentrate their efforts on assessing speech intelligibility or characterizing the classroom in terms of its sound insulation. However, to provide a more comprehensive view of the research landscape, we have conducted an analysis of the distribution of these focuses. The following graph illustrates the percentages of studies dedicated to speech intelligibility, sound insulation, and other related factors, offering insights into the prevailing emphasis within the existing literature.
Figure 4 presents the distribution of research focus in acoustic studies.
While these are undoubtedly critical aspects of acoustic design there seems to be a noticeable gap concerning the comprehensive reference to the measurement and design of noise generated by air exchange systems. This oversight is particularly significant as the noise emanating from these systems can significantly impact the learning environment within educational facilities.
The identified lack of consideration for air quality in studies focusing on acoustics and vice versa raises a pertinent concern, particularly in the context of potential health implications.
It is noteworthy that the heightened vocal effort exerted by teachers, stemming from inadequate acoustical design within educational spaces, might inadvertently contribute to the dispersion of airborne particles, including potential viruses.
In the pursuit of optimal learning environments, where both the physical and mental well-being of students and educators are paramount, it becomes imperative to address the interconnectedness of acoustic conditions and air quality. A comprehensive approach to the design and maintenance of school facilities should encompass both elements to mitigate potential health risks.

4. Conclusions

The experiences of individuals within built environments are intricately shaped by diverse environmental factors, including visual, thermal, acoustic, and air quality stimuli. Despite the extensive literature on these multi-domain exposures, a lack of consistency in methodological approaches and study reporting hampers direct comparisons and meta-analyses.
To address this challenge and bolster future research, this work advocates for increased multi-domain studies and underscores the importance of systematic and transparent study design, conduct, and documentation. To facilitate future research endeavors, a set of quality criteria is proposed for the design and reporting of multi-domain studies.
The critical review of existing literature, guided by these criteria, provides valuable guidelines and recommendations for upcoming studies. The identified quality criteria cover study setup, deployment, analysis, and outcomes, emphasizing the need for consistent terminology and reporting styles. Unveiling various shortcomings in the current approach, the review signals the imperative for enhanced quality in future research.
The ultimate goal is to consolidate knowledge on multi-domain exposures, facilitating integration into regulatory resources and guidelines, which currently predominantly rely on single-domain knowledge.
Within the intricate tapestry of environmental factors, the role of acoustics emerges as particularly pivotal. Acoustic conditions wield a profound influence on the well-being, concentration, and overall experiences of individuals within built environments. Yet, amidst the array of multi-domain exposures, acoustics often stands as an underappreciated protagonist.
Effective communication, crucial for educational and professional settings, relies inherently on the clarity and intelligibility of sound. The acoustic environment of a space significantly shapes this communication, influencing not only verbal exchanges but also the cognitive load placed on individuals. Poor acoustics can lead to increased stress, diminished focus, and compromised learning outcomes.
Recognizing the critical interplay between acoustics and human experiences, our call for enhanced multi-domain studies extends a special emphasis on the need for rigorous exploration of acoustic parameters. A comprehensive understanding of how acoustic conditions intersect with other environmental stimuli is vital, as it contributes not only to the enrichment of scientific knowledge but also to the development of targeted interventions for creating healthier and more supportive built environments.
In light of the identified shortcomings and the imperative for enhanced quality in research efforts, we underscore the urgency of prioritizing acoustic considerations within the broader multi-domain discourse. By doing so, we pave the way for a more holistic and nuanced comprehension of the intricate relationships that govern our experiences within the built environment.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.D.L. and S.M.; methodology, S.D.L. and S.M.; software, S.D.L; validation, X.X., Y.Y. and Z.Z.; formal analysis, S.D.L. and S.M.; investigation, S.D.L.; resources, S.D.L. and S.M.; data curation, S.D.L. and S.M.; writing—original draft preparation, S.D.L. and S.M.; writing—review and editing, S.D.L. and S.M.; visualization, S.D.L. and S.M.; supervision, S.D.L. and S.M.; project administration, S.D.L. and S.M.; no funding acquisition, -. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
IEQ Indoor Environmental comfort
IAQ Indoor air quality
A Acoustic comfort
I Ligthing comfort

References

  1. Ruggieri, G.; Andreolli, F.; Zangheri, P. A Policy Roadmap for the Energy Renovation of the Residential and Educational Building Stock in Italy. Energies 2023, 16. Cited by: 5; All Open Access, Gold Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Minghini, F.; Bertolesi, E.; Del Grosso, A.; Milani, G.; Tralli, A. Modal pushover and response history analyses of a masonry chimney before and after shortening. Engineering Structures 2016, 110, 307–324, Cited by: 30; All Open Access, Bronze Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Campagna, L.M.; Fiorito, F. On the energy performance of the Mediterranean school building stock: The case of the Apulia Region. Energy and Buildings 2023, 293. Cited by: 0; All Open Access, Hybrid Gold Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Achille, C.; Fassi, F.; Mandelli, A.; Fiorillo, F. Surveying cultural heritage: summer school for conservation activities. Applied Geomatics 2018, 10, 579–592, Cited by: 13; All Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Babich, F.; Torriani, G.; Corona, J.; Lara-Ibeas, I. Comparison of indoor air quality and thermal comfort standards and variations in exceedance for school buildings. Journal of Building Engineering 2023, 71. Cited by: 5; All Open Access, Hybrid Gold Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zauli-Sajani, S.; Marchesi, S.; Boselli, G.; Broglia, E.; Angella, A.; Maestri, E.; Marmiroli, N.; Colacci, A. Effectiveness of a Protocol to Reduce Children’s Exposure to Particulate Matter and NO2 in Schools during Alert Days. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2022, 19. Cited by: 1; All Open Access, Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lewis, D. Indoor air is full of flu and COVID viruses. Will countries clean it up? Nature 2023, 615, 206–208, Cited by: 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ferrari, S.; Blázquez, T.; Cardelli, R.; De Angelis, E.; Puglisi, G.; Escandón, R.; Suárez, R. Air Change Rates and Infection Risk in School Environments: Monitoring Naturally Ventilated Classrooms in Northern Italy. Available at SSRN 4375764 2023.
  9. Piazza, S.; Gulino, A.; Pulvirenti, S.; Vercelli, F.; Carrer, P. "Assessment of indoor school environment and identification of measures to protect the respiratory health of school children and adolescents" in a sample of schools in milan; [Valutazione dei fattori di rischio indoor in ambiente scolastico e definizione delle misure per la tutela della salute respiratoria degli Scolari e degli adolescenti" in un campione di scuole di Milano]. Giornale Italiano di Medicina del Lavoro ed Ergonomia 2012, 34, 733–736, Cited by: 1. [Google Scholar]
  10. Buonanno, G.; Giovinco, G.; Morawska, L.; Stabile, L. Lung cancer risk of airborne particles for Italian population. Environmental Research 2015, 142, 443–451, Cited by: 75; All Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. De Giuli, V.; Da Pos, O.; De Carli, M. Indoor environmental quality and pupil perception in Italian primary schools. Building and Environment 2012, 56, 335–345, Cited by: 216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Piccoli, G.B.; Burdese, M.; Bergamo, D.; Mezza, E.; Soragna, G.; Quaglia, M.; Gai, M.; Garofletti, Y.; Martino, B.; D’Aquino, G.; Gino, M.; Biancone, L.; Jeantet, A.; Segoloni, G. Teaching technology with technology: Computer assisted lessons in the medical school - The first Italian experience in nephrology and dialysis. International Journal of Artificial Organs 2002, 25, 860–866, Cited by: 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Romagnoli, P.; Balducci, C.; Perilli, M.; Vichi, F.; Imperiali, A.; Cecinato, A. Indoor air quality at life and work environments in Rome, Italy. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2016, 23, 3503–3516, Cited by: 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Demozzi, G.; Zaniboni, L.; Pernigotto, G.; Gasparella, A. Impact of Visual, Thermal, and Indoor Air Quality Conditions on Students’ Wellbeing and Learning Performance in a Primary School of Bolzano, Italy. 2022, Vol. 2022-June, p. 489 – 497. Cited by: 1.
  15. Simoni, M.; Annesi-Maesano, I.; Sigsgaard, T.; Norback, D.; Wieslander, G.; Nystad, W.; Cancianie, M.; Sestini, P.; Viegi, G. School air quality related to dry cough, rhinitis and nasal patency in children. European Respiratory Journal 2010, 35, 742–749, Cited by: 155; All Open Access, Bronze Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Gatto, M.P.; Gariazzo, C.; Gordiani, A.; L’Episcopo, N.; Gherardi, M. Children and elders exposure assessment to particle-bound polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the city of Rome, Italy. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2014, 21, 13152–13159, Cited by: 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Balocco, C.; Leoncini, L. Energy cost for effective ventilation and air quality for healthy buildings: Plant proposals for a historic building school reopening in the covid-19 era. Sustainability (Switzerland) 2020, 12, 1–16, Cited by: 19; All Open Access, Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kapalo, P.; Mečiarová, L.; Vilčeková, S.; Krídlová Burdová, E.; Domnita, F.; Bacotiu, C.; Péterfi, K.E. Investigation of CO2 production depending on physical activity of students. International Journal of Environmental Health Research 2019, 29, 31–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pénard-Morand, C.; Raherison, C.; Charpin, D.; Kopferschmitt, C.; Lavaud, F.; Caillaud, D.; Annesi-Maesano, I. Long-term exposure to close-proximity air pollution and asthma and allergies in urban children. European Respiratory Journal 2010, 36, 33–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Alves, C.; Duarte, M.; Ferreira, M.; Alves, A.; Almeida, A.; Cunha, Â. Air quality in a school with dampness and mould problems. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health 2016, 9, 107–115. [Google Scholar]
  21. Schibuola, L.; Scarpa, M.; Tambani, C. CO2 based ventilation control in energy retrofit: An experimental assessment. Energy 2018, 143, 606–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Rossi, M.; Barbera, E.; Nasini, M. Reversible constructive system for environmentally sensitive and energy efficient schools in different climate conditions. 2014, Vol. 3, p. 431 – 438. Cited by: 0.
  23. Boeri, A.; Longo, D. Learn to save: Sustainable schools. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment 2011, 143, 425–436, Cited by: 1; All Open Access, Bronze Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Di Loreto, S.; Serpilli, F.; Lori, V.; Di Perna, C. The influence of the acoustic performance in the certification of a school buildings according to the ITACA protocol. Building Acoustics 2022, 29, 559–575, Cited by: 0. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Congedo, P.M.; Baglivo, C.; Toscano, A.M. Implementation hypothesis of the Apulia ITACA Protocol at district level – part II: The case study. Sustainable Cities and Society 2021, 70. Cited by: 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Desideri, U.; Leonardi, D.; Arcioni, L.; Barzotti, M.C.; Sorbi, N. Development and application of an energy and environmental certification method for residential buildings. 2010, Vol. 3, p. 83 – 90. Cited by: 0.
  27. Frattari, A.; Dalprà, M.; Salvaterra, G. The role of the general contractor in sustainable green buildings: The case study of two buildings in the leed certification in italy. International Journal for Housing Science and Its Applications 2012, 36, 139–149, Cited by: 8. [Google Scholar]
  28. Dall’O, G.; Bruni, E.; Panza, A. Improvement of the sustainability of existing school buildings according to the leadership in energy and environmental design (LEED)® protocol: A case study in Italy. Energies 2013, 6, 6487–6507, Cited by: 23; All Open Access, Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Asdrubali, F.; Venanzi, D.; Evangelisti, L.; Guattari, C.; Grazieschi, G.; Matteucci, P.; Roncone, M. An evaluation of the environmental payback times and economic convenience in an energy requalification of a school. Buildings 2021, 11, 1–15, Cited by: 14; All Open Access, Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Corgnati, S.P.; Filippi, M.; Viazzo, S. Perception of the thermal environment in high school and university classrooms: Subjective preferences and thermal comfort. Building and Environment 2007, 42, 951–959, Cited by: 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lucialli, P.; Marinello, S.; Pollini, E.; Scaringi, M.; Sajani, S.Z.; Marchesi, S.; Cori, L. Indoor and outdoor concentrations of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene in some Italian schools evaluation of areas with different air pollution. Atmospheric Pollution Research 2020, 11, 1998–2010, Cited by: 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Buyak, N.; Deshko, V.; Bilous, I.; Pavlenko, A.; Sapunov, A.; Biriukov, D. Dynamic interdependence of comfortable thermal conditions and energy efficiency increase in a nursery school building for heating and cooling period. Energy 2023, 283. Cited by: 1; All Open Access, Hybrid Gold Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, R.; Lu, S.; Feng, W. A three-stage optimization methodology for envelope design of passive house considering energy demand, thermal comfort and cost. Energy 2020, 192, 116723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Deshko, V.; Bilous, I.; Sukhodub, I.; Yatsenko, O. Evaluation of energy use for heating in residential building under the influence of air exchange modes. Journal of Building Engineering 2021, 42, 103020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Theodosiou, T.; Ordoumpozanis, K. Energy, comfort and indoor air quality in nursery and elementary school buildings in the cold climatic zone of Greece. Energy and Buildings 2008, 40, 2207–2214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Serpilli, F.; Di Loreto, S.; Lori, V.; Di Perna, C. The impact of mechanical ventilation systems on acoustic quality in school environments. E3S Web of Conferences. EDP Sciences, 2022, Vol. 343.
  37. Minelli, G.; Puglisi, G.E.; Astolfi, A. Acoustical parameters for learning in classroom: A review. Building and Environment 2022, 208, 108582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Mogas-Recalde, J.; Palau, R.; Márquez, M. How Classroom Acoustics Influence Students and Teachers: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Technology and Science Education 2021, 11, 245–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Minelli, G.; Puglisi, G.E.; Astolfi, A. Acoustical parameters for learning in classroom: A review. Building and Environment 2022, 208, 108582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Young, F.; Cleveland, B. Affordances, architecture and the action possibilities of learning environments: A critical review of the literature and future directions. Buildings 2022, 12, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Nurzyński, J. Sound insulation of lightweight external frame walls and the acoustic effect of additional thermal insulation. Applied Acoustics 2022, 190, 108645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Hongisto, V.; Saarinen, P.; Alakoivu, R.; Hakala, J. Acoustic properties of commercially available thermal insulators- an experimental study. Journal of Building Engineering 2022, 54, 104588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Pellegatti, M.; Torresin, S.; Visentin, C.; Babich, F.; Prodi, N. Indoor soundscape, speech perception, and cognition in classrooms: A systematic review on the effects of ventilation-related sounds on students. Building and Environment 2023, p. 110194.
  44. Visentin, C.; Torresin, S.; Pellegatti, M.; Prodi, N. Indoor soundscape in primary school classrooms. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2023, 154, 1813–1826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Di Gilio, A.; Farella, G.; Marzocca, A.; Giua, R.; Assennato, G.; Tutino, M.; De Gennaro, G. Indoor/outdoor air quality assessment at school near the steel plant in Taranto (Italy). Advances in Meteorology 2017, 2017. Cited by: 16; All Open Access, Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Settimo, G.; Manigrasso, M.; Avino, P. Indoor air quality: A focus on the european legislation and state-of-the-art research in Italy. Atmosphere 2020, 11. Cited by: 58; All Open Access, Gold Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Chinazzo, G.; Andersen, R.K.; Azar, E.; Barthelmes, V.M.; Becchio, C.; Belussi, L.; Berger, C.; Carlucci, S.; Corgnati, S.P.; Crosby, S.; Danza, L.; de Castro, L.; Favero, M.; Gauthier, S.; Hellwig, R.T.; Jin, Q.; Kim, J.; Sarey Khanie, M.; Khovalyg, D.; Lingua, C.; Luna-Navarro, A.; Mahdavi, A.; Miller, C.; Mino-Rodriguez, I.; Pigliautile, I.; Pisello, A.L.; Rupp, R.F.; Sadick, A.M.; Salamone, F.; Schweiker, M.; Syndicus, M.; Spigliantini, G.; Vasquez, N.G.; Vakalis, D.; Vellei, M.; Wei, S. Quality criteria for multi-domain studies in the indoor environment: Critical review towards research guidelines and recommendations. Building and Environment 2022, 226, 109719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; Chou, R.; Glanville, J.; Grimshaw, J.M.; Hróbjartsson, A.; Lalu, M.M.; Li, T.; Loder, E.W.; Mayo-Wilson, E.; McDonald, S.; McGuinness, L.A.; Stewart, L.A.; Thomas, J.; Tricco, A.C.; Welch, V.A.; Whiting, P.; Moher, D. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery 2021, 88, 105906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Moher, D. Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. Journal of clinical epidemiology 2021, 134, 103–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Weng, C.; Tu, S.W.; Sim, I.; Richesson, R. Formal representation of eligibility criteria: a literature review. Journal of biomedical informatics 2010, 43, 451–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Shah, S.R.U.; Mahmood, K. Review of Google scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus search results: The case of inclusive education research. Library Philosophy and Practice 2017. [Google Scholar]
  52. Moschella, A.; Amato, D.; Gagliano, A. Lighting characterization of an Italian beginning twentieth-century school building. Renewable Energy and Power Quality Journal 2023, 21, 381–387, Cited by: 0; All Open Access, Bronze Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ferrari, S.; Blázquez, T.; Cardelli, R.; De Angelis, E.; Puglisi, G.; Escandón, R.; Suárez, R. Air change rates and infection risk in school environments: Monitoring naturally ventilated classrooms in a northern Italian urban context. Heliyon 2023, 9. Cited by: 0; All Open Access, Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Pittana, I.; Morandi, F.; Cappelletti, F.; Gasparella, A.; Tzempelikos, A. Within-and cross-domain effects of environmental factors on students’ perception in educational buildings. Science and Technology for the Built Environment 2023, 29, 678–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Visentin, C.; Pellegatti, M.; Garraffa, M.; Di Domenico, A.; Prodi, N. Individual characteristics moderate listening effort in noisy classrooms. Scientific Reports 2023, 13, 14285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Babich, F.; Torriani, G.; Corona, J.; Lara-Ibeas, I. Comparison of indoor air quality and thermal comfort standards and variations in exceedance for school buildings. Journal of Building Engineering 2023, 71, 106405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lo Verso, V.R.; Giovannini, L.; Valetti, L.; Pellegrino, A. Integrative Lighting in Classrooms: Preliminary Results from Simulations and Field Measurements. Buildings 2023, 13, 2128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Di Loreto, S.; Serpilli, F.; Lori, V.; Di Perna, C. Comparison between Predictive and Measurement Methods of Speech Intelligibility for Educational Rooms of Different Sizes with and without HVAC Systems. Energies 2023, 16, 2719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Torriani, G.; Lamberti, G.; Fantozzi, F.; Babich, F. Exploring the impact of perceived control on thermal comfort and indoor air quality perception in schools. Journal of Building Engineering 2023, 63, 105419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Di Loreto, S.; Cantarini, M.; Squartini, S.; Lori, V.; Serpilli, F.; Di Perna, C. Assessment of speech intelligibility in scholar classrooms by measurements and prediction methods. Building Acoustics 2023, 30, 165–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Albertin, R.; Pernigotto, G.; Gasparella, A.; others. A Monte Carlo Assessment of the Effect of Different Ventilation Strategies to Mitigate the COVID-19 Contagion Risk in Educational Buildings. Indoor Air 2023, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rubino, C.; Liuzzi, S.; Martellotta, F. Sustainable Sound Absorbers to Improve Acoustical Comfort in Atria: A Methodological Approach. Acoustics. MDPI, 2023, Vol. 5, pp. 280–298.
  63. Visentin, C.; Pellegatti, M.; Garraffa, M.; Di Domenico, A.; Prodi, N. Be quiet! Effects of competing speakers and individual characteristics on listening comprehension for primary school students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2023, 20, 4822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Astolfi, A. Premises for Effective Teaching and Learning: State of the Art, New Outcomes and Perspectives of Classroom Acoustics. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ACOUSTICS AND VIBRATION 2023, 28, 86–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Croce, P.; Leccese, F.; Salvadori, G.; Berardi, U. Proposal of a Simplified Tool for Early Acoustics Design Stage of Classrooms in Compliance with Speech Intelligibility Thresholds. Energies 2023, 16, 813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Vettori, G.; Di Leonardo, L.; Secchi, S.; Astolfi, A.; Bigozzi, L. Primary school children’s verbal working memory performances in classrooms with different acoustic conditions. Cognitive Development 2022, 64, 101256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Astolfi, A.; Minelli, G.; Puglisi, G.E. A basic protocol for the acoustic characterization of small and medium-sized classrooms. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2022, 152, 1646–1659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. De Salvio, D.; D’Orazio, D. Effectiveness of acoustic treatments and PA redesign by means of student activity and speech levels. Applied Acoustics 2022, 194, 108783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Lamberti, G.; Salvadori, G.; Leccese, F.; Fantozzi, F.; Bluyssen, P.M. Advancement on thermal comfort in educational buildings: Current issues and way forward. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Zinzi, M.; Pagliaro, F.; Agnoli, S.; Bisegna, F.; Iatauro, D. On the built-environment quality in nearly zero-energy renovated schools: Assessment and impact of passive strategies. Energies 2021, 14, 2799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Naddeo, A.; Califano, R.; Fiorillo, I. Identifying factors that influenced wellbeing and learning effectiveness during the sudden transition into eLearning due to the COVID-19 lockdown. Work 2021, 68, 45–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Verso, V.L.; Giuliani, F.; Caffaro, F.; Basile, F.; Peron, F.; Dalla Mora, T.; Bellia, L.; Fragliasso, F.; Beccali, M.; Bonomolo, M.; others. Questionnaires and simulations to assess daylighting in Italian university classrooms for IEQ and energy issues. Energy and Buildings 2021, 252, 111433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Leccese, F.; Rocca, M.; Salvadori, G.; Belloni, E.; Buratti, C. Towards a holistic approach to indoor environmental quality assessment: Weighting schemes to combine effects of multiple environmental factors. Energy and Buildings 2021, 245, 111056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Avella, F.; Gupta, A.; Peretti, C.; Fulici, G.; Verdi, L.; Belleri, A.; Babich, F. Low-Invasive CO2-based visual alerting systems to manage natural ventilation and improve IAQ in historic school buildings. Heritage 2021, 4, 3442–3468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Leccese, F.; Salvadori, G.; Rocca, M.; Buratti, C.; Belloni, E. A method to assess lighting quality in educational rooms using analytic hierarchy process. Building and Environment 2020, 168, 106501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Laurìa, A.; Secchi, S.; Vessella, L. Acoustic comfort as a salutogenic resource in learning environments—A proposal for the design of a system to improve the acoustic quality of classrooms. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Balocco, C.; Leoncini, L. Energy cost for effective ventilation and air quality for healthy buildings: Plant proposals for a historic building school reopening in the covid-19 era. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Pistore, L.; Pittana, I.; Cappelletti, F.; Romagnoni, P.; Gasparella, A. Analysis of subjective responses for the evaluation of the indoor environmental quality of an educational building. Science and Technology for the Built Environment 2020, 26, 195–209, Cited by: 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Fabozzi, M.; Dama, A. Field study on thermal comfort in naturally ventilated and air-conditioned university classrooms. Indoor and Built Environment 2020, 29, 851–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Berardi, U.; Iannace, G.; Trematerra, A. Acoustic treatments aiming to achieve the italian minimum environmental criteria (CAM) standards in large reverberant classrooms. Canadian Acoustics - Acoustique Canadienne 2019, 47, 73–80, Cited by: 13. [Google Scholar]
  81. Leccese, F.; Rocca, M.; Salvadori, G. Fast estimation of Speech Transmission Index using the Reverberation Time: Comparison between predictive equations for educational rooms of different sizes. Applied Acoustics 2018, 140, 143–149, Cited by: 31; All Open Access, Bronze Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Lassandro, P.; Zonno, M. A work-related learning project for energy efficiency evaluation and indoor comfort of school buildings. Ingenierie des Systemes d’Information 2018, 23, 7–27, Cited by: 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Buratti, C.; Belloni, E.; Merli, F.; Ricciardi, P. A new index combining thermal, acoustic, and visual comfort of moderate environments in temperate climates. Building and Environment 2018, 139, 27–37, Cited by: 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Castilla, N.; Llinares, C.; Bisegna, F.; Blanca-Giménez, V. Affective evaluation of the luminous environment in university classrooms. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2018, 58, 52–62, Cited by: 26; All Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Balocco, C.; Colaianni, A. Assessment of energy sustainable operations on a historical building. The Dante Alighieri high school in Florence. Sustainability (Switzerland) 2018, 10. Cited by: 14; All Open Access, Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Ricciardi, P.; Buratti, C. Environmental quality of university classrooms: Subjective and objective evaluation of the thermal, acoustic, and lighting comfort conditions. Building and Environment 2018, 127, 23–36, Cited by: 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Loreti, L.; Barbaresi, L.; De Cesaris, S.; Garai, M. Overall indoor quality of a non-renewed secondary-school building. Building Acoustics 2016, 23, 47–58, Cited by: 4; All Open Access, Green Open Access. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. De Giuli, V.; Zecchin, R.; Corain, L.; Salmaso, L. Measurements of indoor environmental conditions in Italian classrooms and their impact on childrens comfort. Indoor and Built Environment 2015, 24, 689–712, Cited by: 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. De Giuli, V.; Pontarollo, C.; De Carli, M.; Di Bella, A. Overall assessment of indoor conditions in a school building: An Italian case study. International Journal of Environmental Research 2014, 8, 27–38, Cited by: 10. [Google Scholar]
  90. Di Perna, C.; Mengaroni, E.; Fuselli, L.; Stazi, A. Ventilation strategies in school buildings for optimization of air quality, energy consumption and environmental comfort in mediterranean climates. International Journal of Ventilation 2011, 10, 61–78, Cited by: 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Corgnati, S.P.; Ansaldi, R.; Filippi, M. Thermal comfort in Italian classrooms under free running conditions during mid seasons: Assessment through objective and subjective approaches. Building and Environment 2009, 44, 785–792, Cited by: 135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. ministero dell’ambiente e della tutela del territorio e del mare. Guidelines on technical specifications regarding the adoption of purification devices and ventilation systems in school environments. Decree of the President of the Council of Ministers 26 June, 2022. Available online: https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/Ju/2022/08/22/183/sg/pdf (accessed on 14 December 2023).
  93. ministero dell’ambiente e della tutela del territorio e del mare. Criteri ambientali minimi per l’affidamento di servizi di progettazione e lavori per la nuova costruzione, ristrutturazione e manutenzione di edifici pubblici. Ministerial Decree 23 June, 2022. Available online: https://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/gu/2022/08/06/183/sg/pdf (accessed on 14 December 2023).
  94. 16798-1:2019, U.E. Energy performance of buildings - Ventilation for buildings - Part 1: Internal environment input parameters for the design and assessment of the energy performance of buildings in relation to indoor air quality, thermal environment, lighting and acoustics - Module M1-6. UNI 2019.
  95. 16798-2:2020, U.C. Energy performance of buildings - Ventilation for buildings - Part 2: Interpretation of the requirements of EN 16798-1 - Internal environmental input parameters for the design and assessment of the energy performance of buildings in relation to indoor air quality, thermal environment, lighting and acoustics (Module M1-6). UNI 2020.
  96. ministero dell’ambiente e della tutela del territorio e del mare. Up-to-date technical standards for school buildings, including indices of teaching, building and town planning functions, to be observed in the execution of school buildings. Ministerial Decree 18 December, 1975. Available online: https://www.stanzione.edu.it/normativa-di-riferimento/ (accessed on 14 December 2023).
  97. 10339:1995, U. Aeraulic plants for wellness purposes. General information, classification and requirements. Rules for bidding, bidding, ordering and supply. UNI 1995.
  98. 11367:2023, U. Indications for the evaluation of indoor acoustic characteristics. UNI 2023.
  99. 11532-1, U. Internal acoustic characteristics of confined environments-Design methods and evaluation techniques-Part 1: General requirements. UNI 2018.
  100. 11532-2, U. Internal acoustic characteristics of confined environments-Design methods and evaluation techniques-Part 2: School sector. UNI 2020.
Preprints 95092 g001
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the study selection.
Figure 1. Flow diagram of the study selection.
Preprints 95092 g001
Preprints 95092 g002
Figure 2. Percentage of combined and uncombined effects in the analysis.
Figure 2. Percentage of combined and uncombined effects in the analysis.
Preprints 95092 g002
Preprints 95092 g003
Figure 3. Shifting perspectives: school environmental research trends.
Figure 3. Shifting perspectives: school environmental research trends.
Preprints 95092 g003
Preprints 95092 g004
Figure 4. Distribution of research focus in acoustic studies.
Figure 4. Distribution of research focus in acoustic studies.
Preprints 95092 g004
Table 1. Eligibility criteria used in the selection process of the articles.
Table 1. Eligibility criteria used in the selection process of the articles.
Inclusion criteria (IC)1 Exclusion Criteria (EC)2
Ia - Studies investigating the effect of indoor environmental comfort in school environment. Ea - Studies involving only schools of each grade and number (children of all ages) and universities.
Ib - Studies investigating the effect of thermal, air, lighting and acoustic comfort on students. Eb - Researches that not consider the combined effect of thermo-acoutic parameters and focuses only on the problems related to health impact.
Ic - Studies investigating only research article. Ec - Proceedings, conference paper and book chapter were not consider for the study.
Id - Journal articles that regarded only italian schools and written in english language Ed - The paper does not consider teaching/learning in other language and other country.
1 These criteria are established by researchers or reviewers to define the parameters of the study and ensure that the selected subjects or articles align with the intended scope and objectives. 2 These criteria are established by researchers or reviewers to define limitations and ensure that certain elements are excluded from the study based on predefined factors.
Table 2. The overview of the studies selected for the review where they are indicated: author, title, year of publication, source, keywords and database source.
Table 2. The overview of the studies selected for the review where they are indicated: author, title, year of publication, source, keywords and database source.
Authors Title Year Journal Author
Keywords		 Source
Database
Moschella A. et al.[52] Lighting characterization of an Italian
beginning twentieth-century school building		 2023 Renewable Energy and
Power Quality Journal		 Classroom;
Daylighting;
Historic School Building;
Simulation;
Visual Comfort		 Scopus
Ferrari S. et al.[53] Air change rates and infection risk
in school environments:
Monitoring naturally ventilated classrooms
in a northern Italian
urban context		 2023 Heliyon Air change rates;
Infection risk;
Natural ventilation;
School building;
Transient mass-balance equation;
Well-Riley equation		 Scopus
Pittana I. et al.[54] Within- and cross-domain effects
of environmental factors on students’ perception
in educational buildings		 2023 Science and Technology
for the Built Environment		 School building Google Scholar
Visentin C. et al.[55] Individual characteristics moderate
listening effort in noisy classrooms		 2023 Scientific Reports School building;
IAQ;
speech		 Scopus
Babich F. et al.[56] Comparison of indoor air quality and
thermal comfort standards and
variations in exceedance for school buildings		 2023 Journal of Building
Engineering		 Exceedance;
Field measurements;
IAQ;
School buildings;
Thermal comfort		 Scopus
Lo Verso V.R.M. et al.[57] Integrative Lighting in Classrooms:
Preliminary Results from
Simulations and Field Measurements		 2023 Buildings ALFA simulations;
circadian measures;
integrative lighting;
lighting in classroom;
non-visual effect of light		 Scopus
Di Loreto S. et al.[58] Comparison between Predictive and
Measurement Methods of Speech Intelligibility
for Educational Rooms of Different Sizes
with and without HVAC Systems		 2023 Energies acoustic comfort;
acoustic measurements;
intelligibility;
speech transmission index		 Google Scholar
Torriani G. et al.[59] Exploring the impact of perceived
control on thermal comfort and
indoor air quality perception in schools		 2023 Journal of Building
Engineering		 Field survey;
Indoor air quality;
Perceived control;
School buildings;
Thermal comfort		 Google Scholar
Di Loreto S. et al.[60] Assessment of speech intelligibility
in scholar classrooms by
measurements and prediction methods		 2023 Building Acoustics classroom acoustics;
objective intelligibility measurement;
room acoustic simulation and modeling;
Speech intelligibility prediction		 Google Scholar
Visentin C. et al.[44] Indoor soundscape in primary
school classrooms)		 2023 Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America		 Classroom acoustic;
Classroom soundscape;
Ventilation;
Speech perception;
Cognition;
Indoor comfort		 Scopus
Albertin R. et al.[61] A Monte Carlo Assessment of the Effect of
Different Ventilation Strategies to
Mitigate the COVID-19 Contagion Risk in
Educational Buildings		 2023 Indoor Air ventilation strategies;
concentration		 Scopus
Rubino C. et al.[62] Sustainable Sound Absorbers
to Improve Acoustical Comfort in Atria:
A Methodological Approach		 2023 Acoustics acoustic comfort;
acoustic simulation;
atria;
baffles;
Lombard effect;
open-air spaces;
textile waste		 Scopus
Visentin C. et al.[63] Be Quiet! Effects of Competing Speakers and
Individual Characteristics on Listening Comprehension
for Primary School Students		 2023 International Journal of
Environmental Research and
Public Health		 attention;
children;
classroom acoustics;
cognitive abilities;
listening comprehension;
noise;
noise sensitivity;
working memory		 Scopus
Astolfi A.[64] Premises for Effective Teaching and
Learning: State of the Art, New Outcomes and
Perspectives of Classroom Acoustics		 2023 International Journal of
Acoustics and Vibrations		 attention;
children;
classroom acoustics;		 Scopus
Croce P. et al.[65] Proposal of a Simplified Tool for
Early Acoustics Design Stage of
Classrooms in Compliance with
Speech Intelligibility Thresholds		 2023 Energies clarity index;
classroom acoustics;
prediction diagram;
room acoustics;
speech intelligibility;
students learning		 Scopus
Vettori G. et al.[66] Primary school children’s verbal
working memory performances
in classrooms with different
acoustic conditions		 2022 Cognitive Development Auditory processing;
Classroom acoustic quality;
Primary school children;
Reverberation time;
Verbal working memory		 Scopus
Astolfi A. et al.[67] A basic protocol for the
acoustic characterization of
small and medium-sized
classrooms		 2022 Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America		 Speech communication;
Vocalization;
Acousticc;
Sound level meters;
Sound source perception;
Speech intelligibility;
Precision measurements;
Signal processing;
Signal-to-noise ratio;
Descriptive statistics		 PubMed
De Salvio D. et al.[68] Effectiveness of acoustic treatments and
PA redesign by means of student activity and
speech levels		 2022 Applied Acoustics Classroom acoustics;
Gaussian Mixture Model;
K-means clustering;
Line array;
Machine learning;
Public address;
Student activity		 Scopus
Lamberti G. et al.[69] Advancement on thermal comfort
in educational buildings:
Current issues and way forward		 2021 Sustainability
(Switzerland)		 Educational buildings;
Energy consumptions;
Indoor environmental quality;
Local discomfort;
Thermal comfort		 Scopus
Zinzi M. et al.[70] On the built-environment quality
in nearly zero-energy renovated schools:
Assessment and impact of passive strategies		 2021 Energies Building energy performance;
Indoor Air Quality;
Indoor environmental quality;
Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings;
School buildings;
Thermal comfort		 Scopus
Naddeo A. et al.[71] Identifying factors that influenced
wellbeing and learning effectiveness
during the sudden transition into eLearning
due to the COVID-19 lockdown		 2021 Work comfort;
COVID-19;
discomfort;
human centred design;
university lectures		 Google Scholar
Lo Verso V.R.M. et al.[72] Questionnaires and simulations
to assess daylighting in Italian university
classrooms for IEQ and energy issues		 2021 Energy and Buildings DAYKE project;
DAYKE-Italy;
Comfort in classrooms;
Daylight metrics;
Equivalent melanopic lux;
Questionnaire survey;
Statistical analyses		 Scopus
Leccese F. et al.[73] Towards a holistic approach to
indoor environmental quality assessment:
Weighting schemes to combine effects of
multiple environmental factors		 2021 Energy and Buildings Environmental factors;
Evaluation questionnaires;
Indoor environmental quality;
Occupant satisfaction;
Subjective perception;
Weighting schemes		 Scopus
Avella F. et al.[74] Low-Invasive CO2-based visual alerting
systems to manage natural ventilation and
improve IAQ in historic school buildings		 2021 Heritage Carbon dioxide (CO2);
Historic buildings;
Indoor air quality (IAQ);
Monitoring strategies;
Natural ventilation;
Passive solution;
Schools		 Scopus
Leccese F. et al.[75] A method to assess lighting
quality in educational rooms
using analytic hierarchy process		 2020 Building and Environment Analytic hierarchy process;
Educational rooms;
Experts subjective assessment;
Lighting measurement campaign;
Lighting quality assessment method;
Users subjective questionnaire		 Scopus
Laurìa A. et al.[76] Acoustic comfort as a salutogenic
resource in learning environments:
a proposal for the design of a system
to improve the acoustic quality of classrooms		 2020 Sustainability
(Switzerland)		 Acoustic quality;
Classroom;
Healthy learning;
Indoor environmental quality;
Reverberation time;
Salutogenesis;
Wellbeing		 Scopus
Balocco C. et al.[77] Energy cost for effective ventilation and
air quality for healthy buildings:
Plant proposals for a historic building
school reopening in the covid-19 era		 2020 Sustainability
(Switzerland)		 Controlled ventilation;
Energy sustainability;
Healthy environment;
Historical building school;
Indoor air quality;
Wellbeing		 Scopus
Pistore L. et al.[78] Analysis of subjective responses
for the evaluation of the indoor
environmental quality of an
educational building		 2020 Science and Technology
for the Built Environment		 School building Scopus
Fabozzi M. et al.[79] Field study on thermal
comfort in naturally ventilated
and air-conditioned
university classrooms		 2020 Indoor and Built Environment Adaptive model;
Fanger model;
Field study;
Gender;
Natural ventilation;
Thermal comfort		 Scopus
Berardi U. et al.[80] Acoustic treatments aiming to
achieve the italian minimum
environmental criteria (CAM)
standards in large reverberant classrooms		 2019 Canadian Acoustics Clarity;
Classrooms;
Italian Minimum Environmental Criteria;
Reverberation time;
Speech intelligibility		 Scopus
Leccese F. et al.[81] Fast estimation of Speech Transmission Index
using the Reverberation Time:
Comparison between predictive
equations for educational rooms
of different sizes		 2018 Applied Acoustics Acoustic measurements;
Educational rooms;
Reverberation Time;
Room acoustics;
Speech Transmission Index		 Scopus
Lassandro P. et al.[82] A work-related learning project
for energy efficiency evaluation
and indoor comfort of school buildings		 2018 Ingenierie des Systemes
d’Information		 Energy efficiency;
ICT;
Indoor comfort;
SAPR;
School building;
Virtual tour		 Google Scholar
Buratti C. et al.[83] A new index combining thermal,
acoustic, and visual comfort
of moderate environments
n temperate climates		 2018 Building and Environment Acoustic comfort;
Classrooms;
Combined comfort index;
Questionnaire;
Thermal comfort;
Visual comfort		 Scopus
Castilla N. et al.[84] Affective evaluation of
the luminous environment
in university classrooms		 2018 Journal of Environmental
Psychology		 Affective response;
Classroom tasks;
Kansei engineering;
Luminous environment;
Student perception;
University classroom		 Scopus
Balocco C. et al.[85] Modelling of reversible plant
system operations in a cultural heritage
school building for indoor thermal comfort		 2018 Sustainability
(Switzerland)		 CFD simulation;
Cultural heritage;
Energy refurbishment;
Global and local comfort indexes;
School building;
Thermal comfort		 Scopus
Ricciardi P. et al.[86] Environmental quality of university classrooms:
Subjective and objective evaluation of
the thermal, acoustic, and
lighting comfort conditions		 2018 Building and Environment Acoustic comfort;
Classrooms; Questionnaire;
Thermal comfort;
Visual comfort		 Scopus
Loreti L. et al.[87] Overall indoor quality of a
non-renewed secondary-school building		 2016 Building Acoustics Acoustic characterization;
Building acoustics;
Educational building;
Overall indoor quality;
Room acoustics		 Scopus
De Giuli V. et al.[88] Measurements of indoor environmental
conditions in Italian classrooms and
their impact on childrens comfort		 2015 Indoor and Built Environment Comfort;
Global ranking;
Indoor environmental quality;
Long-term measurements;
Schools;
Survey		 Google Scholar
De Giuli V. et al.[89] Measured and perceived
environmental comfort:
Field monitoring in an
Italian school		 2014 Applied Ergonomics Indoor environmental quality;
Occupant satisfaction;
School		 Scopus
Di Perna C. et al.[90] Ventilation strategies in school buildings
for optimization of air quality,
energy consumption and
environmental comfort
in mediterranean climates		 2011 International Journal of
Ventilation		 Air changes;
Carbon dioxide;
Energy consumption;
Environmental comfort;
Indoor air quality;
Occupied classrooms;
Particulate matter;
Questionnaires;
Retrofitting;
monitoring;
Schools;
Ventilation		 Scopus
Corgnati S. et al.[91] Thermal comfort in Italian
classrooms under free running
conditions during mid seasons:
Assessment through objective and
subjective approaches		 2009 Building and Environment Thermal comfort;
Thermal acceptability;
Thermal preference;
Adaptive models;
Classrooms		 Google Scholar
Table 3. Characteristics of the 42 studies included in this systematic review. The following information is given: 1) Author [Ref], 2) Case study ( type and number of schools), 3) Data collection (type of measurement or subjective evaluation or both), 4) Combined effect (where IEQ= Indoor environmental quality, IAQ= Indoor air quality, A= Acoustic and I= Lighting), 5) Effect considered in each study.
Table 3. Characteristics of the 42 studies included in this systematic review. The following information is given: 1) Author [Ref], 2) Case study ( type and number of schools), 3) Data collection (type of measurement or subjective evaluation or both), 4) Combined effect (where IEQ= Indoor environmental quality, IAQ= Indoor air quality, A= Acoustic and I= Lighting), 5) Effect considered in each study.
Authors Case study Data
collection		 Combined effect
(IAQ+IEQ+A+I)		 Effect
Considered
Moschella A. et al.[52] Primary school (1) Lighting levels,
luminance distribution,
average daylight factor and
daylight autonomy		 No I
Ferrari S. et al.[53] Primary schol (1)
Secondary school (1)		 CO2 concentrations No IAQ
Pittana I. et al.[54] School (3) Globe temperature,
indoor air temperature (Tair),
relative humidity (RH),
air velocity,
Total Volatile Organic
Compounds (TVOC),
CO2,
CO,
horizontal illuminance level
and Aweighted equivalent
sound pressure level (LA,eq)		 Yes
Visentin C. et al.[55] Primary schol (1) LA,eq
and intelligibility		 No A
Babich F. et al.[56] High school (1)
Primary school (1)
Middle school (1)		 TAir,
Tglobe,
RH,
pair
and CO2		 No IAQ + IEQ
Lo Verso V.R.M. et al.[57] Kindergarten (1)
Middle school (1)		 integrative lighting,
non-visual effect of light
and circadian measures		 No I
Di Loreto S. et al.[60] Secondary school (4)
Primary school (3)
University (1)		 LA,eq,
Reverberation time
and intelligibility
(measurement and
predictive methods)		 No A
Torriani G. et al.[59] Primary school (4)
Middle schools (2)
High school (1)
University (3)		 Indoor air temperature,
Outdoor air temperature,
Globe-thermometer temperature,
Relative humidity,
Air velocity,
CO2,
Subjective evaluation (PMV,PPD)		 No IAQ + IEQ
Di Loreto S. et al.[58] Secondary school (4)
Primary school (3)
University (1)		 STI
(measurement and predictive methods)		 No A
Visentin C. et al.[44] Primary schol (3) LA,eq (dB),
RT time, C50 and
subjective evaluation
(auditoty test)		 No A
Albertin R. et al.[61] University (1) CO2 No IAQ
Rubino C. et al.[62] University (1) LA,eq,
Reverberation time,
Absorption and
Scattering Coefficients		 No A
Visentin C. et al.[63] Primary schol (3) Subjective evaluation
of intelligibility		 No A
Astolfi A.[64] Primary school Intelligibility No A
Croce P. et al.[65] University (1) C50
and STI (predictive methods)		 No A
Vettori G. et al.[66] Primary schol (1) Subjective evaluation
of intelligibility		 No A
Astolfi A. et al.[67] Primary schol (1) Speech communication,
Sound level meters,
Sound source perception
and Speech intelligibility		 No A
De Salvio D. et al.[68] University (2) LA,eq,
Reverberation time
and statystical analysis		 No A
Lamberti G. et al.[69] Kindergarten (4)
Primary school (40)
Secondary school (39)
University (60)		 thermal comfort
and indoor environmental
quality		 No IEQ
Zinzi M. et al.[70] School (1) TAir, Top and CO2 No IAQ + IEQ
Naddeo A. et al.[71] University (8) Subjective evaluation of
air quality,
air teperature ,
ventilation
and lighting		 No IAQ + IEQ + I
Lo Verso V.R.M. et al.[72] University (5) Subjective evaluation of
air quality,
air teperature ,
ventilation
and lighting		 No I
Leccese F. et al.[73] University (5) Subjective evaluation of
air quality,
air teperature ,
ventilation
and lighting		 No IAQ + IEQ + I
Avella F. et al.[74] Kindergarten (2)
High school (7)
Secondary school (1)		 air temperature,
relative humidity
and CO2		 No IAQ + IEQ
Leccese F. et al.[75] University (1) lighting No I
Laurìa A. et al.[76] Primary schol (55) RT and absorbition area No A
Balocco C. et al.[77] Hight school (1) Air temperature No IAQ
Pistore L. et al.[78] Secondary school (1) Subjective evaluation of
thermal comfort		 No IEQ
Fabozzi M. et al.[79] University (1) Thermal comfort and
subjective evaluation of
thermal perception		 No IEQ
Berardi U. et al.[80] University (1) C50 and STI No A
Leccese F. et al.[81] University (1) RT and STI No A
Lassandro P. et al.[82] Hight school (1) CO2 concentration,
lighting and
thermal		 No IAQ + IEQ + I
Buratti C. et al.[83] University (1) Thermal,
acoustic and
ligthing parameters		 No IEQ + A + I
Castilla N. et al.[84] University (2) Subjective evaluation
of lighting		 No I
Balocco C. et al.[85] Hight school (1) CFD Transient Simulations
of the Indoor Air Flow Pattern		 No IAQ
Ricciardi P. et al.[86] University (1) Thermal,
acoustic and
ligthing parameters		 No IEQ + A + I
Loreti L. et al.[87] Secondary school (1) Acoustical,
thermal,
indoor air,
lighting and
subjective evaluation		 Yes
De Giuli V. et al.[88] Primary schol (3) Air temperature,
relative humidity,
CO2 concentration,
illuminance and
subjective evaluation		 No IAQ + IEQ + I
De Giuli V. et al.[89] Primary schol (1) Air temperature,
relative humidity and
CO2 concentration		 No IAQ + IEQ
Di Perna C. et al.[90] Secondary school (1) Indoor air quality
and subjective evaluation		 No IAQ + IEQ
Corgnati S. et al.[91] University (2) Thermal comfort and
subjective evaluation of
indoor environmental quality		 No IEQ
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
bsky
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2025 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated