ArticleBMJ open2024
Cross-sectional study of prevalence, causes and trends in visual impairment in Nirmal District, Telangana, India: Nirmal Eye Evaluation for Trends study.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the prevalence, causes and risk factors associated with visual impairment (VI) in the Nirmal district of Telangana, India, using extended Rapid Assessment of Visual Impairment (RAVI) methodology.
designCross-sectional study.
settingCommunity setting.
participantsParticipants aged ≥16 years were enumerated from 90 randomly selected clusters and 4629/5400 (85.7%) participants were examined. Presenting visual acuity (VA) was assessed using a Snellen chart with E optotypes at a 6 m distance. Near vision was assessed binocularly using an N notation chart with tumbling E optotypes at a 40 cm distance. An anterior segment examination done followed by distance direct ophthalmoscopy at 50 cm. Non-mydriatic fundus images were obtained. VI was defined as presenting VA worse than 6/12 in the better eye. The prevalence of VI in the current study was compared with a RAVI study conducted in 2014 to assess the trends in VI among those aged ≥40 years. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Prevalence, causes and risk factors for VI.
resultsAmong those examined, 55% were women, 53% had at least school-level education, 2.3% self-reported diabetes and 8.7% self-reported hypertension. The prevalence of VI was 8.81% (95% CI 8.01% to 9.67%). Overall, uncorrected refractive errors (49.5%) were the leading cause of VI, followed by cataracts (40.2%) and posterior segment diseases (4.9%). Among those aged ≥40 years, the prevalence of VI declined by 19.3% compared with the 2014 baseline study (from 20.2% to 16.3%; p<0.01).
conclusionThe extended RAVI study conducted in the Nirmal district showed a considerable decline in the prevalence of VI. Targeted interventions are needed to provide adequate eye care for the high-risk groups in this district.
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.