ArticleJournal of current ophthalmology
Economic Inequality in Visual Impairment: A Study in Deprived Rural Population of Iran.
Article in Journal of current ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Socioeconomic inequality in self-rated health and its determinants: an Oaxaca blinder decomposition in Ilam, West of Iran during 2023.BMC health services research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine economic inequality in visual impairment (VI) and its determinants in the rural population of Iran.
methodsIn this population-based, cross-sectional study, 3850 individuals, aged 3-93 years were selected from the north and southwest regions of Iran using multi-staged stratified cluster random sampling. The outcome was VI, measured in 20 feet. Economic status was constructed using principal component analysis on home assets. The concentration index (
resultsOf the 3850 individuals that were invited, 3314 participated in the study. The data of 3095 participants were finally analyzed. The C was -0.248 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.347 - -0.148), indicating a pro-poor inequality (concentration of VI in low economic group). The prevalence (95% CI) of VI was 1.72% (0.92-2.52) in the high economic group and 10.66% (8.84-12.48) in the low economic group with a gap of 8.94% (6.95-10.93) between the two groups. The explained and unexplained portions comprised 67.22% and 32.77% of the gap, respectively. Among the study variables, age (13.98%) and economic status (80.70%) were significant determinants of inequality in the explained portion. The variables of education (coefficient: -4.41;
conclusionsThe result showed that VI had a higher concentration in the low economic group, and the major contributor of this inequality was economic status. Therefore, policymakers should formulate appropriate interventions to improve the economic status and alleviate economic inequality.
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.