ArticleCureus2025
Prevalence and Determinants of Computer Vision Syndrome Among Healthcare Providers in Al Baha, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computer vision syndrome and ergonomic risk factors among administrative workers in public health care facilities: a cross-sectional occupational study.Journal of occupational health · 2026Article
- Exploratory machine learning models for computer vision syndrome in occupational health.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The widespread adoption of digital technology in healthcare settings has led to prolonged screen exposure among healthcare providers, increasing their risk of developing computer vision syndrome (CVS). CVS encompasses a range of ocular and extraocular symptoms that significantly impact well-being and productivity. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and determinants of CVS among healthcare providers at King Fahad Hospital (KFH) in Al Baha, Saudi Arabia. Methods A hospital-based, cross-sectional study was conducted, involving 192 healthcare providers selected through stratified random sampling. After their consent, data were collected using a validated questionnaire assessing CVS symptoms, determinants, and preventive practices. Statistical analysis, including logistic regression, was performed to identify the factors associated with CVS. Results The prevalence of CVS was 59.4% (n=114), with pharmacists reporting the highest prevalence (n=16, 84.2%). Significant predictors of CVS included wearing eyeglasses (adjusted odds ratios (aOR)=3.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.66-8.55; p=0.002), computer working time of three to six hours/day (aOR=3.40; 95% CI 1.20-9.67; p = 0.021), being a pharmacist (aOR=7.75; 95% CI 1.22-49.03; p=0.030), and being a nurse/midwife (aOR=3.22; 95% CI 1.01-10.24; p=0.047). Preventive practices, such as always taking regular breaks, were associated with reduced CVS prevalence (aOR=0.11; 95% CI 0.02-0.80; p=0.029). Headache, eye burning, and dryness were the most commonly reported symptoms, while ergonomic practices were inconsistently implemented. Conclusion CVS is a prevalent occupational health issue among healthcare providers at KFH, driven by demographic and occupational factors. Effective preventive measures are essential to mitigate the impact of CVS.
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.