Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26019481›Full record

ArticleMolecular vision2015

Assumption-free estimation of the genetic contribution to refractive error across childhood.

Jeremy A Guggenheim, Beate St Pourcain, George McMahon, Nicholas J Timpson, David M Evans, Cathy Williams

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular vision, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Revisiting the Trans-Ancestry Genetic Correlation of Refractive Error.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025
    Article
  5. Myopia is predominantly genetic or predominantly environmental?Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Article
  6. Myopia in Houston optometry graduates from 2013 to 2023.Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Associations betweenBiomedicines · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Assessing the contribution of genetic nurture to refractive error.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Myopia Genetics and Heredity.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. IMI Risk Factors for Myopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2021
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jeremy A GuggenheimSchool of Optometry & Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Beate St PourcainMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit (IEU) at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
George McMahonMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit (IEU) at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Nicholas J TimpsonMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit (IEU) at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
David M EvansMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit (IEU) at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK ; University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Cathy WilliamsSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
University of Bristol · GBCardiff University · GB

Funding

Department of Health CDF-2009-02-35Medical Research Council MC_PC_15018Medical Research Council MC_UU_12013/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_12013/4Wellcome Trust 102215Wellcome Trust 102215/2/13/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeStudies in relatives have generally yielded high heritability estimates for refractive error: twins 75-90%, families 15-70%. However, because related individuals often share a common environment, these estimates are inflated (via misallocation of unique/common environment variance). We calculated a lower-bound heritability estimate for refractive error free from such bias.

methodsBetween the ages 7 and 15 years, participants in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) underwent non-cycloplegic autorefraction at regular research clinics. At each age, an estimate of the variance in refractive error explained by single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genetic variants was calculated using genome-wide complex trait analysis (GCTA) using high-density genome-wide SNP genotype information (minimum N at each age=3,404).

resultsThe variance in refractive error explained by the SNPs ("SNP heritability") was stable over childhood: Across age 7-15 years, SNP heritability averaged 0.28 (SE=0.08, p<0.001). The genetic correlation for refractive error between visits varied from 0.77 to 1.00 (all p<0.001) demonstrating that a common set of SNPs was responsible for the genetic contribution to refractive error across this period of childhood. Simulations suggested lack of cycloplegia during autorefraction led to a small underestimation of SNP heritability (adjusted SNP heritability=0.35; SE=0.09). To put these results in context, the variance in refractive error explained (or predicted) by the time participants spent outdoors was <0.005 and by the time spent reading was <0.01, based on a parental questionnaire completed when the child was aged 8-9 years old.

conclusionsGenetic variation captured by common SNPs explained approximately 35% of the variation in refractive error between unrelated subjects. This value sets an upper limit for predicting refractive error using existing SNP genotyping arrays, although higher-density genotyping in larger samples and inclusion of interaction effects is expected to raise this figure toward twin- and family-based heritability estimates. The same SNPs influenced refractive error across much of childhood. Notwithstanding the strong evidence of association between time outdoors and myopia, and time reading and myopia, less than 1% of the variance in myopia at age 15 was explained by crude measures of these two risk factors, indicating that their effects may be limited, at least when averaged over the whole population.

Indexed as

Polymorphism, Single NucleotideAdolescentChildCohort StudiesEnglandFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansLeisure ActivitiesMaleMyopiaQuantitative Trait, HeritableReadingRefractive Errors

Identifiers

PMID26019481
PMCPMC4445077
OpenAlexW1858727163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.