ArticleCureus2025
Screening for Refractive Errors Among Nursing Students Using the WHOeyes Application in Shivamogga City.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRefractive errors are one of the most frequent causes of visual impairment globally and remain largely preventable with early screening and correction. Many people suffer from uncorrected refractive errors, even though the interventions are effective and low-cost. Healthcare students, especially nursing students, are at high risk because they spend a long time doing near work and watching screens, but vision screening is not widely practiced in most institutions. This study aims to assess the prevalence of refractive errors among nursing students in Shivamogga city based on the WHOeyes application (World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland) and to determine the risk factors associated with refractive errors. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted among nursing students of Subbaiah Institute of Nursing, Shivamogga, from January to June 2025. Screening of 577 students aged ≥18 years was done with the WHOeyes app. Distance vision was measured at 2 meters, and classification of visual impairment was mild (visual acuity (VA) <6/12-6/18), moderate (VA <6/18-6/60), severe (VA <6/60-3/60), or blindness (VA <3/60). Socio-demographic information was noted. Data were processed employing descriptive statistics, chi-square test, and other relevant tests of significance, with p < 0.05 being significant.
resultsOut of 577 participants, most were 20-22 years old (52.3%), females (84.7%), and rural residents (58.4%). The largest group of students represented socioeconomic class III (36.4%). In the right eye, most participants had normal vision (87.7%), followed by mild (7.6%), moderate (4.2%), and severe impairment (0.5%). In the left eye, normal vision was seen in 84.1%, with mild (12.0%), moderate (2.8%), and severe impairment (1.2%).
conclusionThis study emphasizes the role of regular vision screening among nursing students to detect refractive errors at an early stage, referral at the appropriate time, and increased awareness about ocular health. Incorporation of such screening programs in schools can facilitate a decrease in the load of uncorrected refractive errors and ensure eye health among future healthcare professionals.
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.