Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31007213›Full record

SynthesisIndian journal of ophthalmology2019

Prevalence of refractive errors, uncorrected refractive error, and presbyopia in adults in India: A systematic review.

Sethu Sheeladevi, Bharani Seelam, Phanindra B Nukella, Rishi R Borah, Rahul Ali, Lisa Keay

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Barriers and Enablers to Seeking Eye Care Among the Adult Indian Population: A Systematic Review.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Analysing myopia in Europe: A comprehensive meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Sethu SheeladeviDivision of Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University of London, London, UK.
Bharani SeelamInjury Division, The George Institute for Global Health; UNSW Sydney, Australia.
Phanindra B NukellaVISION 2020: The Right to Sight, India.
Rishi R BorahOrbis International, India.
Rahul AliOrbis International, India.
Lisa KeayInjury Division, The George Institute for Global Health; UNSW Sydney, Australia.
Centre for Sight · INCity, University of London · GBUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this review is to estimate the prevalence of refractive errors, uncorrected refractive error (URE), and uncorrected presbyopia in adults aged ≥30 years in India. Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. A detailed literature search was performed to include all studies published from India from the year 1990 using the Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase. Refractive error was defined by >0.50 D ametropia. URE was defined by presenting visual acuity (PVA) worse than 6/18 improving with pinhole or spectacle correction, and uncorrected presbyopia by near vision <N8 improving with correction in the absence of distance URE. Results: Fifteen studies were included from South India, one each from Western and Central India, and one study covered 15 states across India. The prevalence of RE of at least 0.50 D of spherical equivalent ametropia was 53.1% [(95% confidence interval (CI): 37.2-68.5), of which myopia and hyperopia was 27.7% and 22.9%, respectively. The prevalence of URE was 10.2% (95% CI: 6.9-14.8), but heterogeneity in these estimates was very high. The prevalence of uncorrected presbyopia was 33% (95% CI: 19.1-51.0). Conclusion: This review highlights the magnitude of refractive errors among adults in India. More studies are needed using standard methods in regions where there is a lack of information on UREs. Programs delivering spectacles for adults in India will need to primarily focus on reading glasses to correct presbyopia along with spectacles for hyperopia and myopia.

Indexed as

AdultHumansIndiaPresbyopiaPrevalenceRefraction, OcularRefractive ErrorsHyperopiamyopiapresbyopiarefractive errorsvisual impairment

Identifiers

PMID31007213
PMCPMC6498913
OpenAlexW2941292737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.