Cataract surgical rate and economic indicators are closely associated, indicating the strong influence of resource availability on healthcare delivery. Considering this relationship, it is important to be innovative in delivery of low-cost services and invest strategically in capacity development to meet cataract surgical need in low-resource settings.

Background To evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of continued repeated low‐level red‐light (RLRL) therapy on myopia control over 2 years, and the potential rebound effect after treatment cessation. Methods The Chinese myopic children who originally completed the one‐year randomised controlled trial were enrolled. Children continued RLRL‐therapy were defined as RLRL‐RLRL group, while those who stopped and switched to single‐vision spectacle (SVS) in the second year were RLRL‐SVS group. Likewise, those who continued to merely wear SVS or received additional RLRL‐therapy were SVS‐SVS and SVS‐RLRL groups, respectively. RLRL‐therapy was provided by an at‐home desktop light device emitting red‐light of 650 nm and was administered for 3 min at a time, twice a day and 5 days per week. Changes in axial length (AL) and cycloplegic spherical equivalence refraction (SER) were measured. Results Among the 199 children who were eligible, 138 (69.3%) children attended the examination and 114 (57.3%) were analysed (SVS‐SVS: n = 41; SVS‐RLRL: n = 10; RLRL‐SVS: n = 52; RLRL‐RLRL: n = 11). The baseline characteristics were balanced among four groups. In the second year, the mean changes in AL were 0.28 ± 0.14 mm, 0.05 ± 0.24 mm, 0.42 ± 0.20 mm and 0.12 ± 0.16 mm in SVS‐SVS, SVS‐RLRL, RLRL‐SVS and RLRL‐RLRL group, respectively (p < 0.001). The respective mean SER changes were −0.54 ± 0.39D, −0.09 ± 0.55D, −0.91 ± 0.48D, and −0.20 ± 0.56D (p < 0.001). Over the 2‐year period, axial elongation and SER progression were smallest in RLRL‐RLRL group (AL: 0.16 ± 0.37 mm; SER: −0.31 ± 0.79D), followed by SVS‐RLRL (AL: 0.44 ± 0.37 mm; SER: −0.96 ± 0.70D), RLRL‐SVS (AL: 0.50 ± 0.28 mm; SER: −1.07 ± 0.69D) and SVS‐SVS group (AL: 0.64 ± 0.29 mm; SER: −1.24 ± 0.63D). No self‐reported adverse events, functional or structural damages were noted. Conclusions Continued RLRL therapy sustained promising efficacy and safety in slowing myopia progression over 2 years. A modest rebound effect was noted after treatment cessation.

BackgroundTo evaluate the peripapillary choroidal thickness of a healthy Chinese population, and to determine its influencing factors.MethodsA total of 76 healthy volunteers (76 eyes) without ophthalmic or systemic symptoms were enrolled. Choroidal scans (360-degree 3.4 mm diameter peripapillary circle scans) were obtained for all eyes using enhanced depth imaging spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Choroid thickness was measured at the temporal, superotemporal, superior, superonasal, nasal, inferonasal, inferior, and inferotemporal segments.ResultsThe average peripapillary choroidal thicknesses were 165.03 ± 40.37 μm. Inferonasal, inferior, and inferotemporal thicknesses were significantly thinner than temporal, superotemporal, superior, superonasal, nasal thicknesses (p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found among inferonasal, inferior, and inferotemporal thicknesses. The average peripapillary choroidal thickness decreased linearly with age (β = −1.33, 95% CI −1.98, -0.68, P < 0.001). No correlation was noted between average choroidal thickness and other factors (gender, refractive error, axial length, average retinal nerve fiber layer thickness, intraocular pressure, diastolic blood pressure, systolic blood pressure, mean blood pressure, diastolic ocular perfusion pressure, systolic ocular perfusion pressure, and mean ocular perfusion pressure).ConclusionsThe inferonasal, inferior, inferotemporal peripapillary choroidal thicknesses were significantly thinner than temporal, superotemporal, superior, superonasal, and nasal thicknesses. A thinner peripapillary choroid is associated with increasing age.

Purpose: To evaluate the trends and variations in global health burden of glaucoma by year, age and sex, region and socio-economic status, using disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Method: The DALY numbers, crude DALY rate and age-standardized DALY rate globally and in each country were obtained the GBD 2015 study database. The corresponding human development index (HDI) and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita were obtained from the United Nations and World Bank. Environmental data were obtained from the WHO Global Health Observatory data repository. Results: From 1990 to 2015, the DALY number and age-standardized DALY rate due to glaucoma increased by 122% and 15%, respectively. Both male and female showed similar increasing trend with ageing, with the peak at 60 years old and increasing again since 75 years old. Sex disparities in DALY number were noted, with higher burden among female than male in each age group (all p < 0.001). The health burden of glaucoma was substantial unequal, with Gini coefficient of 0.865 for DALY number, 0.235 for crude DALY rate and 0.254 for age-standardized DALY rate, respectively. The age-standardized DALY was significantly associated with HDI, accounting for 22.2% variance across countries (R 2 = 0.222, p < 0.001). Similarly, the GDP per capita was inversely associated with age-standardized DALY rate but can explain only 10.6% variations in age-standardized DALY rate (R 2 = 0.106, p < 0.001). The agestandardized DALY rate due to glaucoma was positively associated with national levels of ultraviolet radiation and PM 2.5 . Conclusion: The health burden of glaucoma continuously increased in the past 25 years and distributed unequally. Lower socio-economic level, older age, female, higher ambient ultraviolet radiation and higher level of air pollution were significantly associated with higher burden of glaucoma.

The CONSORT-EHEALTH checklist is intended for authors of randomized trials evaluating web-based and Internet-based applications/interventions, including mobile interventions, electronic games (incl multiplayer games), social media, certain telehealth applications, and other interactive and/or networked electronic applications. Some of the items (e.g. all subitems under item 5 -description of the intervention) may also be applicable for other study designs.The goal of the CONSORT EHEALTH checklist and guideline is to be a) a guide for reporting for authors of RCTs, b) to form a basis for appraisal of an ehealth trial (in terms of validity) CONSORT-EHEALTH items/subitems are MANDATORY reporting items for studies published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research and other journals / scientific societies endorsing the checklist.Items numbered 1., 2., 3., 4a., 4b etc are original CONSORT or CONSORT-NPT (nonpharmacologic treatment) items. Items with Roman numerals (i., ii, iii, iv etc.) are CONSORT-EHEALTH extensions/clarifications.As the CONSORT-EHEALTH checklist is still considered in a formative stage, we would ask that you also RATE ON A SCALE OF 1-5 how important/useful you feel each item is FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CHECKLIST and reporting guideline (optional).Mandatory reporting items are marked with a red *.