Risk Factors for Developing Myopia among Schoolchildren in Yerevan and Gegharkunik province

Giloyan, Aida; Harutyunyan, Tsovinar; Petrosyan, Varduhi

doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckv176.223

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The characteristics of all included studies are shown in table 1 and in the appendix (pp 28-29). Ten (30%) studies 18,20,23,27,28,32,[35][36][37][38] met the criteria for inclusion in category one, ten (30%) studies 19,21,22,29,30,[39][40][41][42][43] for inclusion in category two (table 1), and 13 (39%) studies [44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56] for inclusion in category three (appendix pp [28][29]. Seven (70%) category one studies 18,20,23,27,28,32,35 and four (40%) category two studies 19,22,29,30 were included in the meta-analysis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…20,21,23,27,29,30,32,[35][36][37]40,41,43 Even though some European studies 18,19,22,28,38,39,42 were included, no eligible studies from other world regions were identified. Similarly, category three studies were mostly done in east Asia (nine [69%] of 13) [45][46][47][48][49][50][51]53,55 or Europe (three [23%]), 44,52,54 with one done in the Middle East. 56 Eight (80%) category one studies, 18,20,27,28,32,[36][37][38] seven (70%) category two studies, 21,22,29,30,39,41,42 and 11 (85%) category three studies [44]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, category three studies were mostly done in east Asia (nine [69%] of 13) [45][46][47][48][49][50][51]53,55 or Europe (three [23%]), 44,52,54 with one done in the Middle East. 56 Eight (80%) category one studies, 18,20,27,28,32,[36][37][38] seven (70%) category two studies, 21,22,29,30,39,41,42 and 11 (85%) category three studies [44][45][46][47][48][49][50]52,53,55,56 were cross-sectional, and the remaining two category one studies, 23,35 three category two studies, 19,40,43 and two category three studies 51,54 were prospective.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…41 Regression analysis showed no difference in the myopic spherical equivalent between these two groups, 41 and screen exposure was not significantly associated with myopia progression at follow-up. 40 All 13 category three studies measured refraction, and most (seven [54%]) found no association between the duration of near-vision work and either myopia 44,[49][50][51]53 or spherical equivalent. 46,49,50,56 Each additional h per week of near-vision work (ie, use of a smartphone, computer, or television, or reading books or studying) was associated with a 1% increase in the odds of myopia 47 and a 26% increase in the odds of severe myopia 48 in two nationwide Taiwanese studies, respectively.…”

Section: Table 1: Characteristics Of Studies On the Association Between Smart Device Use And Myopia Included In The Systematic Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Association between digital smart device use and myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Foreman

Salim²,

Praveen³

et al. 2021

The Lancet Digital Health

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Excessive use of digital smart devices, including smartphones and tablet computers, could be a risk factor for myopia. We aimed to review the literature on the association between digital smart device use and myopia.Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched MEDLINE and Embase, and manually searched reference lists for primary research articles investigating smart device (ie, smartphones and tablets) exposure and myopia in children and young adults (aged 3 months to 33 years) from database inception to June 2 (MEDLINE) and June 3 (Embase), 2020. We included studies that investigated myopia-related outcomes of prevalent or incident myopia, myopia progression rate, axial length, or spherical equivalent. Studies were excluded if they were reviews or case reports, did not investigate myopia-related outcomes, or did not investigate risk factors for myopia. Bias was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists for analytical cross-sectional and cohort studies. We categorised studies as follows: category one studies investigated smart device use independently; category two studies investigated smart device use in combination with computer use; and category three studies investigated smart device use with other near-vision tasks that were not screen-based. We extracted unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs), β coefficients, prevalence ratios, Spearman's correlation coefficients, and p values for associations between screen time and incident or prevalent myopia. We did a meta-analysis of the association between screen time and prevalent or incident myopia for category one articles alone and for category one and two articles combined. Random-effects models were used when study heterogeneity was high (I²>50%) and fixed-effects models were used when heterogeneity was low (I²≤50%).Findings 3325 articles were identified, of which 33 were included in the systematic review and 11 were included in the meta-analysis. Four (40%) of ten category one articles, eight (80%) of ten category two articles, and all 13 category three articles used objective measures to identify myopia (refraction), whereas the remaining studies used questionnaires to identify myopia. Screen exposure was measured by use of questionnaires in all studies, with one also measuring device-recorded network data consumption. Associations between screen exposure and prevalent or incident myopia, an increased myopic spherical equivalent, and longer axial length were reported in five (50%) category one and six (60%) category two articles. Smart device screen time alone (OR 1•26 [95% CI 1•00-1•60]; I²=77%) or in combination with computer use (1•77 [1•28-2•45]; I²=87%) was significantly associated with myopia. The most common sources of risk of bias were that all 33 studies did not include reliable measures of screen time, seven (21%) did not objectively measure myopia, and nine (27%) did not identify or adjust for confounders in the analysis. The high heterogeneity between studies included in the meta-analys...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Table 1: Characteristics Of Studies On the Association Between Smart Device Use And Myopia Included In The Systematic Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Association between digital smart device use and myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Foreman

Salim²,

Praveen³

et al. 2021

The Lancet Digital Health

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Children with myopia spent signifiant more time with near activities and less time with sports compared with emmetropes (normal réfraction) 3 . The main significant risk factors for myopia development are age, region, continous reading, school achèvement and parental myopia 1,4 . Even geography seems to play an important role in the development of myopia: The prevalence of myopia seems to be higher in Urban areas and Chinese population, but the regional and racial difference is not that apparent in population > 40 years 4 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Myopia the global progressive healthproblem: Are wereadingtoomuch?

Rashiti

Zahiti²

2017

Bangladesh J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of Factors Associated with Myopia among Middle School Students in Urban and Rural Regions of Anhui, China

Peng

Sun

Wang³

et al. 2022

Optom Vis Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevention and control of myopia have become a major public health task throughout the world. The analysis of the modifiable factors associated with myopia will help in planning concrete strategies that can be widely implemented by schools and families.PURPOSE: This study assessed the modifiable factors associated with myopia and compared them between rural and urban regions. METHODS: Data were collected from December 2020 to March 2021. A multistage stratified cluster sampling method was used to select 6154 middle school students. All children underwent an eye examination, including visual acuity and cycloplegic refraction. Data on near work, sleep, and outdoor activities were collected in questionnaires. RESULTS: The myopia prevalence values in urban and rural regions were 68.1 and 63.7%, respectively (χ 2 = 15.57, P < .001). More than 3 hours of homework per day (odds ratio [OR] in urban and rural regions, 1.36 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.07 to 1.75] vs. 1.72 [95% CI, 1.43 to 2.07]), 36 to 40 core subjects per week (OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.04 to 1.57] vs. 1.42 [95% CI, 1.24 to 1.64]), and going to sleep before 10 o'clock (OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.93] vs. 0.50 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.90]) were significantly associated with myopia in both regions. In contrast, taking breaks during near work was a significant factor in the rural region (<1 hour: OR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.76]; 1 to 2 hours: OR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.86]) but not in the urban region. More time outdoors per day was associated with a reduced prevalence of myopia only for urban children (2 to 3 hours: OR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.97]; >3 hours: OR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.75]).CONCLUSIONS: Homework loads and the time of going to sleep were associated with myopia for children in both urban and rural regions. However, time outdoors was only associated with myopia in urban regions, and taking breaks during near work was only associated with myopia in rural regions.

show abstract

Risk Factors for Developing Myopia among Schoolchildren in Yerevan and Gegharkunik province

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Association between digital smart device use and myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Association between digital smart device use and myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Myopia the global progressive healthproblem: Are wereadingtoomuch?

Comparison of Factors Associated with Myopia among Middle School Students in Urban and Rural Regions of Anhui, China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Risk Factors for Developing Myopia among Schoolchildren in Yerevan and Gegharkunik province

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Association between digital smart device use and myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Association between digital smart device use and myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Myopia  the global progressive healthproblem: Are wereadingtoomuch?

Comparison of Factors Associated with Myopia among Middle School Students in Urban and Rural Regions of Anhui, China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Myopia the global progressive healthproblem: Are wereadingtoomuch?