ArticlePloS one2017
Traffic-related air pollution and spectacles use in schoolchildren.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between ambient air pollution and prevalence of myopia in Korean men.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Long-term exposure to PMBMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Association between building density and screening myopia in children and adolescents: a 5-year longitudinal study from China.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Correlation between perceived air pollution and myopia: an exploration of the mediating effects of healthy lifestyle factors.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Area-level factors influencing geographical distribution of myopia prevalence among school-aged children and adolescents in Northwest China.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Association between outdoor air pollutant exposure and refractive error changes: A retrospective clinical practice study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Associations between per- and polyfluoroalkyl substance exposure and the prevalence of myopia in adolescents: the mediating role of serum albumin.Environmental health and preventive medicine · 2025Article
- The influence of the environment and lifestyle on myopia.Journal of physiological anthropology · 2024Review
- Effects of air pollution on myopia: an update on clinical evidence and biological mechanisms.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Review
- Progress on application of spatial epidemiology in ophthalmology.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
- Greenness Surrounding Schools and Visual Impairment in Chinese Children and Adolescents.Environmental health perspectives · 2021Article
- IMI Risk Factors for Myopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2021Review
- Geographical Variation in Likely Myopia and Environmental Risk Factors: A Multilevel Cross Classified Analysis of A UK Cohort.Ophthalmic epidemiology · 2020Article
- Effect of Genetic-Environmental Interaction on Chinese Childhood Myopia.Journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Mental health status of parents of young patients with high myopia.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
- Impacts of climate change on ocular health: A scoping review.The journal of climate change and healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the association between exposure to traffic-related air pollution and use of spectacles (as a surrogate measure for myopia) in schoolchildren.
methodsWe analyzed the impact of exposure to NO2 and PM2.5 light absorbance at home (predicted by land-use regression models) and exposure to NO2 and black carbon (BC) at school (measured by monitoring campaigns) on the use of spectacles in a cohort of 2727 schoolchildren (7-10 years old) in Barcelona (2012-2015). We conducted cross-sectional analyses based on lifelong exposure to air pollution and prevalent cases of spectacles at baseline data collection campaign as well as longitudinal analyses based on incident cases of spectacles use and exposure to air pollution during the three-year period between the baseline and last data collection campaigns. Logistic regression models were developed to quantify the association between spectacles use and each of air pollutants adjusted for relevant covariates.
resultsAn interquartile range increase in exposure to NO2 and PM2.5 absorbance at home was respectively associated with odds ratios (95% confidence intervals (CIs)) for spectacles use of 1.16 (1.03, 1.29) and 1.13 (0.99, 1.28) in cross-sectional analyses and 1.15 (1.00, 1.33) and 1.23 (1.03, 1.46) in longitudinal analyses. Similarly, odds ratio (95% CIs) of spectacles use associated with an interquartile range increase in exposures to NO2 and black carbon at school was respectively 1.32 (1.09, 1.59) and 1.13 (0.97, 1.32) in cross-sectional analyses and 1.12 (0.84, 1.50) and 1.27 (1.03, 1.56) in longitudinal analyses. These findings were robust to a range of sensitivity analyses that we conducted.
conclusionWe observed increased risk of spectacles use associated with exposure to traffic-related air pollution. These findings require further confirmation by future studies applying more refined outcome measures such as quantified visual acuity and separating different types of refractive errors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.