ArticlePloS one2021
Relationship between practices of eye protection against solar ultraviolet radiation and cataract in a rural area.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sunglasses use, UV protection, and knowledge of UV radiation among adults in Poland: a cross-sectional study.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2026Article
- Knowledge, practices and barriers to sun protection among farmers in Bagua Grande (Peru): a mixed-methods study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Climate change and eye health: Awareness of health sciences students at a South African University.Health SA = SA Gesondheid · 2026Article
- Shedding light on pharmacoepidemiology of eye diseases: a cohort study in Western Iran.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Cataract Prevalence in Patients with Cutaneous Melanoma in Lithuanian Population.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Occupational exposures and age-related cataract: A review.Archives of environmental & occupational health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCataract is a public health concern worldwide that differentially affects rural residents of outlying islands where ultraviolet radiation (UVR) may have greater penetration because of less shading.
objectivesTo assess the relationships between attitudes and practices of eye protection and eye diseases for residents of an offshore island of Taiwan.
methodsQuestionnaire survey was administered to local residents (age > 50 years) regarding socio-demographic information, attitudes/practices of eye protection under sun exposure and eye diseases.
resultsA total of 816 participants (response rate 90.7%, 816/900) completed the questionnaires. Mean age was 63.7 (+ 10.8) years. Among these participants, 44.4%, 15.1% and 8.3% had cataract, dry eye and glaucoma, respectively. Although 86.3% and 88.2% of participants agreed that they should avoid outdoor activities and wear glasses/broad-brimmed hats in harsh daylight, 69.4% and 48.3% of participants never/rarely used glasses or hats/umbrellas in harsh daylight, respectively. Predictors of less practices of eye protection against solar UVR included residents who were male, with lower education level, with longer residence and lack of commercial health insurance. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that practices of eye protection under sun exposure were significantly associated with less cataract, but not glaucoma or dry eye. Participants who did not wear glasses, broad-brimmed hats/use umbrellas or both in harsh sunlight (almost) every time were respectively associated with a 57% (P = 0.028), 45% (P = 0.027) or 70% (P = 0.026) increase of cataract than those who did in harsh sunlight (almost) every time.
conclusionsPractices of eye protection under sun exposure is associated with lower risk of cataract.
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.