Dataset Information

Myopia and Near Work: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Myopia is a global public health problem affecting quality of life and work productivity. Data is scarce regarding the effects of near work on myopia. Providing a larger meta-analysis with life-long perspective, including adults and occupational exposure seemed needed.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Science Direct for studies reporting myopia prevalence in near work. Myopia was defined as a mean spherical equivalent ≤ -0.50 diopter. We performed a meta-analysis using random-effects model on myopia prevalence, myopia progression per year, and odds ratio (OR) of myopia in near work, completed by subgroup analyses and meta-regressions on patients' characteristics, type of work in adults, geographic zones, time and characteristics of near work.

Results

We included 78 studies, representing a total of 254,037 participants, aged from 6 to 39 years. The global prevalence of myopia in near work was 35% (95% CI: 30 to 41%), with a prevalence of 31% (95% CI: 26 to 37%) in children and 46% (95% CI: 30 to 62%) in adults. Myopia progression was -0.39 diopters per year (-0.53 to -0.24 D/year), ranging from -0.44 (-0.57 to -0.31) in children to -0.25 D/year (-0.56 to 0.06) in adults. The odds of myopia in workers exposed vs. non-exposed to near work were increased by 26% (18 to 34%), by 31% (21 to 42%) in children and 21% (6 to 35%) in adults. Prevalence of myopia was higher in adults compared to children (Coefficient 0.15, 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.27).

Conclusions

Near work conditions, including occupational exposure in adults, could be associated with myopia. Targeted prevention should be implemented in the workplace.

SUBMITTER: Dutheil F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9820324 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Myopia and Near Work: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Dutheil Frédéric F Oueslati Tharwa T Delamarre Louis L Castanon Joris J Maurin Caroline C Chiambaretta Frédéric F Baker Julien S JS Ugbolue Ukadike C UC Zak Marek M Lakbar Ines I Pereira Bruno B Navel Valentin V

International journal of environmental research and public health 20230103 1

<h4>Background</h4>Myopia is a global public health problem affecting quality of life and work productivity. Data is scarce regarding the effects of near work on myopia. Providing a larger meta-analysis with life-long perspective, including adults and occupational exposure seemed needed.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Science Direct for studies reporting myopia prevalence in near work. Myopia was defined as a mean spherical equivalent ≤ -0.50 diopter. We performe ...[more]

PMID: 36613196

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, with the rapid development of machine learning (ML), it has gained widespread attention from researchers in clinical practice. ML models appear to demonstrate promising accuracy in the diagnosis of complex diseases, as well as in predicting disease progression and prognosis. Some studies have applied it to ophthalmology, primarily for the diagnosis of pathologic myopia and high myopia-associated glaucoma, as well as for predicting the progression of high myopia. ML-based detection still requires evidence-based validation to prove its accuracy and feasibility.ObjectiveThis study aims to discern the performance of ML methods in detecting high myopia and pathologic myopia in clinical practice, thereby providing evidence-based support for the future development and refinement of intelligent diagnostic or predictive tools.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science were thoroughly retrieved up to September 3, 2023. The prediction model risk of bias assessment tool was leveraged to appraise the risk of bias in the eligible studies. The meta-analysis was implemented using a bivariate mixed-effects model. In the validation set, subgroup analyses were conducted based on the ML target events (diagnosis and prediction of high myopia and diagnosis of pathological myopia and high myopia-associated glaucoma) and modeling methods.ResultsThis study ultimately included 45 studies, of which 32 were used for quantitative meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results unveiled that for the diagnosis of pathologic myopia, the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC), sensitivity, and specificity of ML were 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.98), 0.91 (95% CI 0.89-0.92), and 0.95 (95% CI 0.94-0.97), respectively. Specifically, deep learning (DL) showed an SROC of 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.98), sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.93), and specificity of 0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.97), while conventional ML (non-DL) showed an SROC of 0.86 (95% CI 0.75-0.92), sensitivity of 0.77 (95% CI 0.69-0.84), and specificity of 0.85 (95% CI 0.75-0.92). For the diagnosis and prediction of high myopia, the SROC, sensitivity, and specificity of ML were 0.98 (95% CI 0.96-0.99), 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.96), and 0.94 (95% CI 0.88-0.97), respectively. For the diagnosis of high myopia-associated glaucoma, the SROC, sensitivity, and specificity of ML were 0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.97), 0.92 (95% CI 0.85-0.96), and 0.88 (95% CI 0.67-0.96), respectively.ConclusionsML demonstrated highly promising accuracy in diagnosing high myopia and pathologic myopia. Moreover, based on the limited evidence available, we also found that ML appeared to have favorable accuracy in predicting the risk of developing high myopia in the future. DL can be used as a potential method for intelligent image processing and intelligent recognition, and intelligent examination tools can be developed in subsequent research to provide help for areas where medical resources are scarce.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42023470820; https://tinyurl.com/2xexp738.

Project description:PurposeIncreased prevalence of myopia is a major public health challenge worldwide, including in Africa. While previous studies have shown an increasing prevalence in Africa, there is no collective review of evidence on the magnitude of myopia in African school children. Hence, this study reviews the evidence and provides a meta-analysis of the prevalence of myopia in African school children.MethodsThis review was conducted using the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Five computerized bibliographic databases, PUBMED, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and Africa Index Medicus were searched for published studies on the prevalence of myopia in Africa from 1 January 2000 to 18 August 2021. Studies were assessed for methodological quality. Data were gathered by gender, age and refraction technique and standardized to the definition of myopia as refractive error ≥ 0.50 diopter. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the prevalence. Significant heterogeneity was detected among the various studies (I2 >50%), hence a random effect model was used, and sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the effects of outliers.ResultsWe included data from 24 quality assessed studies, covering 36,395 African children. The overall crude prevalence of myopia over the last two decades is 4.7% (95% CI, 3.9-5.7) in African children. Although the prevalence of myopia was slightly higher in females (5.3%, 95%CI: 4.1, 6.5) than in males (3.7%, 95% CI, 2.6-4.7; p = 0.297) and higher in older [12-18 years 5.1% (95% CI, 3.8-6.3) than younger children (aged 5-11 years, 3.4%, 95% CI, 2.5-4.4; p = 0.091), the differences were not significant. There was a significantly lower prevalence of myopia with cycloplegic compared with non-cycloplegic refraction [4.2%, 95%CI: 3.3, 5.1 versus 6.4%, 95%CI: 4.4, 8.4; p = 0.046].ConclusionsOur results showed that myopia affects about one in twenty African schoolchildren, and it is overestimated in non-cycloplegic refraction. Clinical interventions to reduce the prevalence of myopia in the region should target females, and school children who are aged 12-18 years.

Project description:ObjectiveTo synthesise the association of shift work with major vascular events as reported in the literature.Data sourcesSystematic searches of major bibliographic databases, contact with experts in the field, and review of reference lists of primary articles, review papers, and guidelines.Study selectionObservational studies that reported risk ratios for vascular morbidity, vascular mortality, or all cause mortality in relation to shift work were included; control groups could be non-shift ("day") workers or the general population.Data extractionStudy quality was assessed with the Downs and Black scale for observational studies. The three primary outcomes were myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and any coronary event. Heterogeneity was measured with the I(2) statistic and computed random effects models.Results34 studies in 2,011,935 people were identified. Shift work was associated with myocardial infarction (risk ratio 1.23, 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 1.31; I(2)=0) and ischaemic stroke (1.05, 1.01 to 1.09; I(2)=0). Coronary events were also increased (risk ratio 1.24, 1.10 to 1.39), albeit with significant heterogeneity across studies (I(2)=85%). Pooled risk ratios were significant for both unadjusted analyses and analyses adjusted for risk factors. All shift work schedules with the exception of evening shifts were associated with a statistically higher risk of coronary events. Shift work was not associated with increased rates of mortality (whether vascular cause specific or overall). Presence or absence of adjustment for smoking and socioeconomic status was not a source of heterogeneity in the primary studies. 6598 myocardial infarctions, 17,359 coronary events, and 1854 ischaemic strokes occurred. On the basis of the Canadian prevalence of shift work of 32.8%, the population attributable risks related to shift work were 7.0% for myocardial infarction, 7.3% for all coronary events, and 1.6% for ischaemic stroke.ConclusionsShift work is associated with vascular events, which may have implications for public policy and occupational medicine.

Project description:ImportanceThe association of digital screen time with myopia has been documented, but the dose-response association and safe exposure threshold remain unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate the dose-response association of time spent on digital screens with myopia risk.Data sourcesPubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for full-length articles from peer-reviewed journals without restrictions on study design, publication date, or language from inception to November 25, 2024.Study selectionPrimary research articles investigating the association of exposure to digital screen devices (ie, smartphones, tablets, game consoles, computers, or television) with myopia-related outcomes (ie, prevalent or incident myopia and the rate of myopia progression) were identified by reviewers.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers extracted data using a standardized procedure in accordance with the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. A random-effects, dose-response meta-analysis (DRMA) was utilized to examine the pattern of the association of screen time with myopia.Main outcome and measuresIncreased odds of myopia per hour of daily screen time.ResultsIn the linear DRMA of 45 studies with 335 524 participants (mean [SD] age, 9.3 [4.3] years), an additional hour of daily screen time was associated with higher odds of myopia (odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.13-1.30). The nonlinear DRMA of 34 studies with 314 910 participants also indicated higher odds of myopia with increasing screen time, ranging from 1 hour of daily exposure (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09) to 4 hours (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.56-2.40). The dose-response curve showed myopia risk increasing significantly between 1 to 4 hours of daily screen time, and then rising more gradually after 4 hours.Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review and DRMA, a daily 1-hour increment in digital screen time was associated with 21% higher odds of myopia and the dose-response pattern exhibited a sigmoidal shape, indicating a potential safety threshold of less than 1 hour per day of exposure, with an increase in odds up to 4 hours. These findings can offer guidance to clinicians and researchers regarding myopia risk.

Project description:IntroductionThis work aimed to comprehensively assess the risk factors affecting myopia in children to develop more effective prevention and treatment strategies. To this end, data from database were employed to assess the relationship between the incidence of myopia and its risk factors.MethodsWe searched eight databases online in June 2022. Cohort studies were included that measured the connection between risk factors and myopia. Eligibility was not restricted by language. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to measure the risk of bias and conducted GRADE evaluation to determine the certainty of evidence. Potential risk factors with positive or negative results were seen. Inplasy Registration: https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-4-0109/.ResultsEvidence that risk factors for myopia are mixed, comprising both positive (20) and null (17) findings. In 19 cohort studies on 3578 children, girls were more likely to develop myopia (RR: 1.28 [1.22-1.35]). Myopia can occur at any age, from early childhood to late adulthood. Children whose parents had myopia were more likely to develop myopia. Longer outdoor activities time (RR: 0.97 [0.95-0.98]) and less near-work time (RR: 1.05 [1.02-1.07]) appeared to be significantly decrease the incidence of myopia. Children with lower SE, longer AL, a lower magnitude of positive relative accommodation, worse presenting visual acuity, deeper anterior chamber, and thinner crystalline lens may be related to myopia onset. The burden of myopia in underprivileged countries is higher than in developed countries (RR: 5.28 [2.06-13.48]). The quality of evidence for the evaluated factors was moderate to low or very low.ConclusionsGenetic factors, environmental factors (such as excessive use of electronic products, and poor study habits) and lifestyle factors (such as lack of outdoor activities, poor nutrition, etc.) are the main risk factors for myopia in children. Myopia prevention strategies should be designed based on environmental factors, gender, parental myopia and eye indicators in order to explore a lifestyle that is more conducive to the eye health of children.

Dataset Information

Myopia and Near Work: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Myopia and Near Work: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets