Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30111785›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Trends of Visual Impairment and Blindness in the Singapore Chinese Population over a Decade.

Yih-Chung Tham, Sing-Hui Lim, Yuan Shi, Miao-Li Chee, Ying Feng Zheng, Jacqueline Chua, Seang-Mei Saw, Paul Foster, Tin Aung, Tien Yin Wong and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

11 authors.

Yih-Chung ThamSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Sing-Hui LimSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Yuan ShiSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Miao-Li CheeSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Ying Feng ZhengSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Jacqueline ChuaSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-6474-5293
Seang-Mei SawSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Paul FosterInstitute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4755-177X
Tin AungSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Tien Yin WongSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Ching-Yu ChengSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore. chingyu.cheng@duke-nus.edu.sg.

Funding

MOH | National Medical Research Council (NMRC) NMRC/CSA-SI/0012/2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We evaluated the prevalence of visual impairment (VI) and blindness among Chinese adults in the Singapore Chinese Eye Study (SCES, 2009-2011), and compared the trends with the Tanjong Pagar Survey, Singapore (TPS), conducted a decade earlier. The SCES comprised of 3,353 Chinese adults aged ≥40 years (response rate, 72.8%). Participants underwent standardized examinations, including measurements of presenting, and best-corrected visual acuity (VA). Bilateral VI (VA < 20/40 to ≥20/200) and blindness (VA < 20/200) were defined based on the United States definition (better-seeing eye). Age-standardized prevalence was calculated using the 2010 Singapore Chinese Population Census. Primary causes and factors associated with VI and blindness were evaluated. In SCES, the age-standardized prevalence of presenting bilateral VI and blindness were 17.7% and 0.6%, respectively; the age-standardised prevalence of best-corrected bilateral VI and blindness were 3.4% and 0.2%, respectively. The previous TPS reported similar rates of best-corrected bilateral VI (3.8%) and blindness (0.3%). In SCES, cataract remains the main cause for both best-corrected bilateral VI (76.0%) and blindness (50.0%). Older age, female, lower income, lower educational level, and smaller housing type were associated with presenting bilateral VI or blindness (all P ≤ 0.025). These findings will be useful for the planning of eye care services and resource allocation.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAsian PeopleBlindnessChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPersons with Visual DisabilitiesPrevalenceSingaporeVision DisordersVisual Acuity

Identifiers

PMID30111785
PMCPMC6093864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.