SynthesisArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2026
Pooled prevalence of symptomatic dry eye and its associated factors among adults in Africa: (2016-2025) systematic review and meta-analysis study.
Synthesis in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDry eye disease poses a significant global public health concern, with notable implications for populations in Africa. Individuals affected by this condition experience symptoms such as ocular discomfort, dryness, burning, irritation, reflex tearing, and visual disturbances. Despite numerous studies investigating the prevalence and risk factors of symptomatic dry eye across African populations, findings remain inconsistent and fragmented, lacking a comprehensive synthesis of its overall burden and determinants within the region. To address this gap, the present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to estimate the pooled prevalence of symptomatic dry eye and to elucidate its principal associated factors across Africa.
methodWe conducted a comprehensive literature search across multiple databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library, as well as by reviewing references from relevant articles following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The methodological quality was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist. Publication bias was assessed using both Funnel Plot visualization and Egger's regression test. Heterogeneity was quantified using Higgins' I² statistics. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed, and a random-effects model was applied to estimate the pooled prevalence of symptomatic dry eye. All statistical analyses were performed with STATA version 17.
resultsA systematic review of 5,044 studies published from 2016 to 2025 identified 12 eligible for meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of symptomatic dry eye among African adults was 61.29% (95% CI: 51.41-71.17). Subgroup analyses revealed the highest prevalence in South Africa (92%; 95% CI: 87.66-96.34), in community settings (76.08%; 95% CI: 62.66-89.51), and among studies conducted from 2016 to 2021 (67.99%; 95% CI: 54.23-81.75). The lowest prevalence was reported in Ethiopia (43.64%; 95% CI: 36.94-50.34). Significant associated factors included visual display use for more than 5 h (OR: 3.95; 95% CI: 2.20-7.10), diabetes duration of 11 years or more (OR: 2.85; 95% CI: 2.04-3.97), poor glycemic control (OR: 2.57; 95% CI: 1.91-3.47), allergic conjunctivitis (OR: 2.79; 95% CI: 1.66-4.70), and ophthalmic drop use (OR: 3.05; 95% CI: 1.53-6.11).
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD420251043328.
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.