Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30880904›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2019

Refractive errors among Saudi college students and associated risk factors.

Bayan A Alsaif, Mohanna Y Aljindan, Hanan M Alrammah, Malak O Almulla, Saad S Alshahrani

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Myopia and Near Work: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The prevalence of refractive errors among Saudi adults in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Factors contributing to spectacle intolerance: Insights from a multicenter study in Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
    Article
  15. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bayan A AlsaifCollege of Medicine, King Fahad Hospital of the University, Imam Abdulrahamn Bin Fasial University, Khobar, Saudi Arabia, bayan.alsaif@gmail.com.
Mohanna Y AljindanDepartment of Ophthalmology, King Fahad Hospital of the University, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Fasial University, Khobar, Saudi Arabia.
Hanan M AlrammahCollege of Medicine, King Fahad Hospital of the University, Imam Abdulrahamn Bin Fasial University, Khobar, Saudi Arabia, bayan.alsaif@gmail.com.
Malak O AlmullaCollege of Medicine, King Fahad Hospital of the University, Imam Abdulrahamn Bin Fasial University, Khobar, Saudi Arabia, bayan.alsaif@gmail.com.
Saad S AlshahraniEpidemiology Department, King Fahd Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
King Fahd Hospital of the University · SAKing Fahad Specialist Hospital · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine the prevalence of refractive errors among freshman students of Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU), and to examine the relationship of near-work activities and outdoor activities with refractive errors.

methodsA cross-sectional study of 338 freshman students of IAU (162 males, 176 females) was carried out. Students were selected using a simple random sampling technique. Eye examination was done including non-cycloplegic autorefraction for determining the refractive error status. Myopia was defined as spherical equivalent refraction (SER) ≤-0.75 diopters (D), and it was further divided into low myopia (SER from -0.75 D to -2.99 D), moderate myopia (SER from -3.00 to -5.99 D), and high myopia (SER ≤-6.00 D). Hyperopia was defined as SER ≥1.00 D and emmetropia as having an SER value between that of low myopia and hyperopia. SER was calculated as sphere + 1/2 cylinder. A questionnaire detailed on activities was completed by participants.

resultsMyopia was found in 47.9% of the students (95% CI 42.7%-53.3%). The most prevalent type of myopia was low myopia (66.7%; 95% CI 59.1%-73.5%). Hyperopia and emmetropia were found in 6.5% (95% CI 4.3%-9.7%) and 45.6% (95% CI 40.3%-50.9%) of the students, respectively. Parental myopia was significantly associated with the myopic status of the students (

conclusionAlthough the different types of activities did not predict the types of refractive errors, the high prevalence of myopia among the college students at this age requires further studies to explore more about the clinical characteristics and risk factors of the disease.

Indexed as

anterior chamber depthaxial lengthbiometrycollege studentskeratometrymyopianear-workoutdoor activity

Identifiers

PMID30880904
PMCPMC6398403
OpenAlexW2916111513

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.