Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37982764›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2023

Changes in Refractive Error During Young Adulthood: The Effects of Longitudinal Screen Time, Ocular Sun Exposure, and Genetic Predisposition.

Samantha Sze-Yee Lee, Gareth Lingham, Carol A Wang, Santiago Diaz Torres, Craig E Pennell, Pirro G Hysi, Christopher J Hammond, Puya Gharahkhani, Rosie Clark, Jeremy A Guggenheim and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. IMI-2025 Digest.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Effect of screen time and refractive errors on subjective and objective assessment of dry eye disease in young female subjects.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
    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

11 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Samantha Sze-Yee LeeCentre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science (incorporating the Lions Eye Institute), the University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Gareth LinghamCentre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science (incorporating the Lions Eye Institute), the University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Carol A WangSchool of Medicine and Public Health, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Santiago Diaz TorresQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Craig E PennellSchool of Medicine and Public Health, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Pirro G HysiKing's College London, Section of Ophthalmology, School of Life Course Sciences, London, United Kingdom.
Christopher J HammondKing's College London, Section of Ophthalmology, School of Life Course Sciences, London, United Kingdom.
Puya GharahkhaniQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Rosie ClarkSchool of Optometry & Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Jeremy A GuggenheimSchool of Optometry & Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
David A MackeyCentre for Ophthalmology and Visual Science (incorporating the Lions Eye Institute), the University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Lions Eye Institute · AUKing's College London · GBORCID · USHunter Medical Research Institute · AUJohn Hunter Hospital · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Changes in refractive error during young adulthood is common yet risk factors at this age are largely unexplored. This study explored risk factors for these changes, including gene-environmental interactions. Methods: Spherical equivalent refraction (SER) and axial length (AL) for 624 community-based adults were measured at 20 (baseline) and 28 years old. Participants were genotyped and their polygenic scores (PGS) for refractive error calculated. Self-reported screen time (computer, television, and mobile devices) from 20 to 28 years old were collected prospectively and longitudinal trajectories were generated. Past sun exposure was quantified using conjunctival ultraviolet autofluorescence (CUVAF) area. Results: Median change in SER and AL were -0.023 diopters (D)/year (interquartile range [IQR] = -0.062 to -0.008) and +0.01 mm/year (IQR = 0.000 to 0.026), respectively. Sex, baseline myopia, parental myopia, screen time, CUVAF, and PGS were significantly associated with myopic shift. Collectively, these factors accounted for approximately 20% of the variance in refractive error change, with screen time, CUVAF, and PGS each explaining approximately 1% of the variance. Four trajectories for total screen time were found: "consistently low" (n = 148), "consistently high" (n = 250), "consistently very high" (n = 76), and "increasing" (n = 150). Myopic shift was faster in those with "consistently high" or "consistently very high" screen time compared to "consistently-low" (P ≤ 0.031). For each z-score increase in PGS, changes in SER and AL increased by -0.005 D/year and 0.002 mm/year (P ≤ 0.045). Of the three types of screen time, only computer time was associated with myopic shift (P ≤ 0.040). There was no two- or three-way interaction effect between PGS, CUVAF, or screen time (P ≥ 0.26). Conclusions: Higher total or computer screen time, less sun exposure, and genetic predisposition are each independently associated with greater myopic shifts during young adulthood. Given that these factors explained only a small amount of the variance, there are likely other factors driving refractive error change during young adulthood.

Indexed as

MyopiaRefractive ErrorsAdultConjunctivaGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansScreen TimeSunlightYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID37982764
PMCPMC10668617
OpenAlexW4388824845

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.