Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34234353›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Ambient light level varies with different locations and environmental conditions: Potential to impact myopia.

Shashank Kishore Bhandary, Rohit Dhakal, Vishwa Sanghavi, Pavan Kumar Verkicharla

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shashank Kishore BhandaryProf. Brien Holden Eye Research Centre, Myopia Research Lab, Brien Holden Institute of Optometry and Vision Sciences, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Rohit DhakalProf. Brien Holden Eye Research Centre, Myopia Research Lab, Brien Holden Institute of Optometry and Vision Sciences, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Vishwa SanghaviProf. Brien Holden Eye Research Centre, Myopia Research Lab, Brien Holden Institute of Optometry and Vision Sciences, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Pavan Kumar VerkicharlaProf. Brien Holden Eye Research Centre, Myopia Research Lab, Brien Holden Institute of Optometry and Vision Sciences, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.ORCID 0000-0001-7755-2178
L V Prasad Eye Institute · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeConsidering that time spent outdoors is protective for myopia, we investigated how ambient light levels reaching the eye varies across 9 outdoor and 4 indoor locations in 5 different environmental conditions.

methodsIlluminance (lux) was recorded using a lux meter under conditions of weather (sunny/cloudy), time of a day (7:00,10:00,13:00, and 16:00 hours), seasons (summer/winter), and sun protection (hat and cap) in outdoor and indoor locations. Nine outdoor locations were "open playground", "under a translucent artificial-shade", "under a porch facing east", "under a porch facing south", "under a big tree", "between three buildings", "within 4 buildings", and "canopy". As a ninth outdoor location, "Under a glass bowl" in the outdoor location was used as a simulation for "glass classroom model" and measurement was taken at the floor level only to determine in overall the illuminance conditions with glass covered on all sides. The 4 indoor locations included "room with multiple large windows", "room with combination light source", "room with multiple artificial lights", and "room with single artificial light".

resultsThe overall median illuminance level (median; Q1-Q3) recorded in 9 outdoor locations was 8 times higher than that of all indoor locations (1175;197-5400 lux vs. 179;50-333 lux). Highest illuminance in outdoor locations was recorded in "open playground" (9300;4100-16825 lux), followed by "under a translucent artificial shade (8180;4200-13300 lux) and the lowest in "within 4 buildings" (11;6-20 lux). Illuminance under 'Canopy', 'between three buildings' and 'within four buildings' was similar to that of indoor locations (<1000 lux). Time of the day, weather, season, sensor position and using sun protection did not alter illuminance to change from high to low level (>1000 to <1000 lux). Among indoor locations, illuminance in "room with multiple large windows" crossed 1000 lux at a specific time points on both sunny and cloudy days.

conclusionsIlluminance levels in outdoors and indoors varied with location type, but not with other conditions. Given the variation in illuminance in different locations, and the impact it may have on myopia control, appropriate detailed recommendations seems necessary while suggesting time outdoors as an anti-myopia strategy to ensure desired outcomes.

Indexed as

EnvironmentLightHumansMyopiaSeasonsTime FactorsWeather

Identifiers

PMID34234353
PMCPMC8263252
OpenAlexW3178714987

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.