PurposeThe aim of the study was a systematic review of refractive errors across the world according to the WHO regions.MethodsTo extract articles on the prevalence of refractive errors for this meta-analysis, international databases were searched from 1990 to 2016. The results of the retrieved studies were merged using a random effect model and reported as estimated pool prevalence (EPP) with 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsIn children, the EPP of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism was 11.7% (95% CI: 10.5–13.0), 4.6% (95% CI: 3.9–5.2), and 14.9% (95% CI: 12.7–17.1), respectively. The EPP of myopia ranged from 4.9% (95% CI: 1.6–8.1) in South–East Asia to 18.2% (95% CI: 10.9–25.5) in the Western Pacific region, the EPP of hyperopia ranged from 2.2% (95% CI: 1.2–3.3) in South-East Asia to 14.3% (95% CI: 13.4–15.2) in the Americas, and the EPP of astigmatism ranged from 9.8% in South-East Asia to 27.2% in the Americas. In adults, the EPP of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism was 26.5% (95% CI: 23.4–29.6), 30.9% (95% CI: 26.2–35.6), and 40.4% (95% CI: 34.3–46.6), respectively. The EPP of myopia ranged from 16.2% (95% CI: 15.6–16.8) in the Americas to 32.9% (95% CI: 25.1–40.7) in South-East Asia, the EPP of hyperopia ranged from 23.1% (95% CI: 6.1%–40.2%) in Europe to 38.6% (95% CI: 22.4–54.8) in Africa and 37.2% (95% CI: 25.3–49) in the Americas, and the EPP of astigmatism ranged from 11.4% (95% CI: 2.1–20.7) in Africa to 45.6% (95% CI: 44.1–47.1) in the Americas and 44.8% (95% CI: 36.6–53.1) in South-East Asia. The results of meta-regression showed that the prevalence of myopia increased from 1993 (10.4%) to 2016 (34.2%) (P = 0.097).ConclusionThis report showed that astigmatism was the most common refractive errors in children and adults followed by hyperopia and myopia. The highest prevalence of myopia and astigmatism was seen in South-East Asian adults. The highest prevalence of hyperopia in children and adults was seen in the Americas.

Purpose: This study was conducted to determine the prevalence and risk factors for keratoconus worldwide. Methods: In this meta-analysis, using a structured search strategy from 2 sources, 4 electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Scopus) and the reference lists of the selected articles were searched from inception to June 2018 with no restrictions and filters. The outcome of the study was the prevalence of keratoconus and its risk factors, including eye rubbing, family history of keratoconus, atopy, allergy, asthma, eczema, diabetes type I and type II, and sex. Results: In this study, 3996 articles were retrieved, of which 29 were analyzed. These 29 articles included 7,158,241 participants from 15 countries. The prevalence of keratoconus in the whole population was 1.38 per 1000 population [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.14–1.62 per 1000]. The prevalence of keratoconus was 20.6 per 1000 (95% CI: 11.68–28.44 per 1000) in men and 18.33 per 1000 (95% CI: 8.66–28.00 per 1000) in women in studies reporting sex. The odds ratio of eye rubbing, family history of keratoconus, allergy, asthma, and eczema was 3.09 (95% CI: 2.17–4.00), 6.42 (95% CI: 2.59–10.24), 1.42 (95% CI: 1.06–1.79), 1.94 (95% CI: 1.30–2.58), and 2.95 (95% CI: 1.30–4.59), respectively. Conclusions: The results of this study, as the most comprehensive meta-analysis of keratoconus prevalence and risk factors, showed that keratoconus had a low prevalence in the world and eye rubbing, family history of keratoconus, allergy, asthma, and eczema were the most important risk factors for keratoconus according to the available evidence.

Aim: To determine the prevalence of refractive errors among schoolchildren in urban and rural areas of Dezful County, Iran. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, using random cluster sampling, 5721 Dezful schoolchildren were selected from 39 clusters. The participants in the study totalled 5544; 3673 elementary and middle school students and 1871 high school students. For the former group, cycloplegic refraction and for the latter, noncycloplegic refraction was tested. In all participants, uncorrected visual acuity and best corrected visual acuity were determined, and those with a visual acuity of 20/40 or worse, underwent a complete ophthalmic examination to determine the cause of visual impairment. A spherical equivalent of 20.5 diopter (D) or worse was defined as myopia, +2.0 D or more was defined as hyperopia, and a cylinder refraction greater than 0.75 D was considered astigmatism. Results: The uncorrected visual acuity was 20/40 or worse in the better eye of 224 schoolchildren (3.8% of participants). This figure (percentage) was 14 (0.03%) based on their best corrected visual acuity and 96 (1.7%) with their presenting vision. According to results of cycloplegic refraction, 3.4% (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.5 to 4.4) of the primary and middle school students were myopic and 16.6% (95% CI, 13.6 to 19.7) were hyperopic. For high school students, these rates were 2.1% (95% CI, 0.7 to 3.5) and 33.0% (95% CI, 24.9 to 41.1), respectively, with non-cycloplegic refraction. In the multivariate logistic regression for primary and middle school students, myopia was correlated with age (p = 0.030), and hyperopia was correlated with age (p,0.001) and area of residence (p = 0.007). In high school students, hyperopia again showed a correlation with their area of residence (p = 0.029). Conclusion: The present study reveals the considerable prevalence rates of refractive errors among schoolchildren in Dezful County and the high rate of an unmet need for their correction. Although myopia is not very prevalent, the high rate of hyperopia in the studied population emphasises its need for attention. R efractive errors are among the leading causes of visual impairment worldwide and are responsible for high rates of low vision and blindness in certain areas.

No abstract

No abstract