-
Molecular Psychiatry Jan 2023To conduct the first systematic review and meta-analysis assessing whether attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with disorders of the eye,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
To conduct the first systematic review and meta-analysis assessing whether attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with disorders of the eye, and/or altered measures of visual function.
METHOD
Based on a pre-registered protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42021256352), we searched PubMed, Web of Knowledge/Science, Ovid Medline, Embase and APA PsycINFO up to 16th November 2021, with no language/type of document restrictions. We included observational studies reporting at least one measure of vision in people of any age meeting DSM/ICD criteria for ADHD and in people without ADHD; or the prevalence of ADHD in people with and without vision disorders. Study quality was assessed with the Appraisal tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS). Random effects meta-analyses were used for data synthesis.
RESULTS
We included 42 studies in the narrative synthesis and 35 studies in the meta-analyses (3,250,905 participants). We found meta-analytic evidence of increased risk of astigmatism (OR = 1.79 [CI: 1.50, 2.14]), hyperopia and hypermetropia (OR = 1.79 [CI: 1.66, 1.94]), strabismus (OR = 1.93 [CI: 1.75, 2.12]), unspecified vision problems (OR = 1.94 [CI: 1.38, 2.73]) and reduced near point of convergence (OR = 5.02 [CI: 1.78, 14.11]); increased lag (Hedge's g = 0.63 [CI: 0.30, 0.96]) and variability (Hedge's g = 0.40 [CI: 0.17, 0.64]) of the accommodative response; and increased self-reported vision problems (Hedge's g = 0.63 [CI: 0.44, 0.82]) in people with ADHD compared to those without ADHD (with no significant heterogeneity). We also found meta-analytic evidence of no differences between people with and without ADHD on retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (Hedge's g = -0.19 [CI: -0.41, 0.02]) and refractive error (Hedge's g = 0.08 [CI: -0.26, 0.42]) (with no significant heterogeneity).
DISCUSSION
ADHD is associated with some self-reported and objectively ascertained functional vision problems, but not with structural alterations of the eye. Further studies should clarify the causal relationship, if any, between ADHD and problems of vision.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration: CRD42021256352.
Topics: Humans; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Cross-Sectional Studies; Prevalence; Eye Diseases
PubMed: 35931758
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-022-01699-0 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2016This systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the risk of development of concomitant strabismus due to refractive errors. Eligible studies published from 1946... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the risk of development of concomitant strabismus due to refractive errors. Eligible studies published from 1946 to April 1, 2016 were identified from MEDLINE and EMBASE that evaluated any kinds of refractive errors (myopia, hyperopia, astigmatism and anisometropia) as an independent factor for concomitant exotropia and concomitant esotropia. Totally 5065 published records were retrieved for screening, 157 of them eligible for detailed evaluation. Finally 7 population-based studies involving 23,541 study subjects met our criteria for meta-analysis. The combined OR showed that myopia was a risk factor for exotropia (OR: 5.23, P = 0.0001). We found hyperopia had a dose-related effect for esotropia (OR for a spherical equivalent [SE] of 2-3 diopters [D]: 10.16, P = 0.01; OR for an SE of 3-4D: 17.83, P < 0.0001; OR for an SE of 4-5D: 41.01, P < 0.0001; OR for an SE of ≥5D: 162.68, P < 0.0001). Sensitivity analysis indicated our results were robust. Results of this study confirmed myopia as a risk for concomitant exotropia and identified a dose-related effect for hyperopia as a risk of concomitant esotropia.
Topics: Anisometropia; Astigmatism; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Esotropia; Exotropia; Female; Humans; Hyperopia; Male; Myopia; Odds Ratio; Refractive Errors; Risk Factors; Strabismus
PubMed: 27731389
DOI: 10.1038/srep35177 -
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics : the... Nov 2022To determine the diagnostic agreement of non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction in children. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To determine the diagnostic agreement of non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction in children.
METHOD
The study methodology followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Electronic databases were searched for comparative studies exploring refraction performed on children under non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic conditions. There was no restriction on the year of publication; however, only publications in the English language were eligible. Inclusion criteria consisted of children aged ≤12 years, any degree or type of refractive error, either sex and no ocular or binocular co-morbidities. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Meta-analysis was conducted to synthesise data from all included studies. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were undertaken for those studies with a risk of bias.
RESULTS
Ten studies consisting of 2724 participants were eligible and included in the meta-analysis. The test for overall effect was not significant when comparing non-cycloplegic Plusoptix and cycloplegic autorefractors (Z = 0.34, p = 0.74). The pooled mean difference (MD) was -0.08 D (95% CI -0.54 D, +0.38 D) with a prediction interval of -1.72 D to +1.56 D. At less than 0.25 D, this indicates marginal overestimation of myopia and underestimation of hyperopia under non-cycloplegic conditions. When comparing non-cycloplegic autorefraction with a Retinomax and Canon autorefractor to cycloplegic refraction, a significant difference was found (Z = 9.79, p < 0.001) and (Z = 4.61, p < 0.001), respectively.
DISCUSSION
Non-cycloplegic Plusoptix is the most useful autorefractor for estimating refractive error in young children with low to moderate levels of hyperopia. Results also suggest that cycloplegic refraction must remain the test of choice when measuring refractive error ≤12 years of age. There were insufficient data to explore possible reasons for heterogeneity. Further research is needed to investigate the agreement between non-cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction in relation to the type and level of refractive error at different ages.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Hyperopia; Mydriatics; Myopia; Refraction, Ocular; Refractive Errors; Vision Tests
PubMed: 35913773
DOI: 10.1111/opo.13022 -
Journal of Current Ophthalmology Mar 2018The aim of the study was a systematic review of refractive errors across the world according to the WHO regions. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aim of the study was a systematic review of refractive errors across the world according to the WHO regions.
METHODS
To extract articles on the prevalence of refractive errors for this meta-analysis, international databases were searched from 1990 to 2016. The results of the retrieved studies were merged using a random effect model and reported as estimated pool prevalence (EPP) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
In children, the EPP of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism was 11.7% (95% CI: 10.5-13.0), 4.6% (95% CI: 3.9-5.2), and 14.9% (95% CI: 12.7-17.1), respectively. The EPP of myopia ranged from 4.9% (95% CI: 1.6-8.1) in South-East Asia to 18.2% (95% CI: 10.9-25.5) in the Western Pacific region, the EPP of hyperopia ranged from 2.2% (95% CI: 1.2-3.3) in South-East Asia to 14.3% (95% CI: 13.4-15.2) in the Americas, and the EPP of astigmatism ranged from 9.8% in South-East Asia to 27.2% in the Americas. In adults, the EPP of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism was 26.5% (95% CI: 23.4-29.6), 30.9% (95% CI: 26.2-35.6), and 40.4% (95% CI: 34.3-46.6), respectively. The EPP of myopia ranged from 16.2% (95% CI: 15.6-16.8) in the Americas to 32.9% (95% CI: 25.1-40.7) in South-East Asia, the EPP of hyperopia ranged from 23.1% (95% CI: 6.1%-40.2%) in Europe to 38.6% (95% CI: 22.4-54.8) in Africa and 37.2% (95% CI: 25.3-49) in the Americas, and the EPP of astigmatism ranged from 11.4% (95% CI: 2.1-20.7) in Africa to 45.6% (95% CI: 44.1-47.1) in the Americas and 44.8% (95% CI: 36.6-53.1) in South-East Asia. The results of meta-regression showed that the prevalence of myopia increased from 1993 (10.4%) to 2016 (34.2%) ( = 0.097).
CONCLUSION
This report showed that astigmatism was the most common refractive errors in children and adults followed by hyperopia and myopia. The highest prevalence of myopia and astigmatism was seen in South-East Asian adults. The highest prevalence of hyperopia in children and adults was seen in the Americas.
PubMed: 29564404
DOI: 10.1016/j.joco.2017.08.009 -
BMC Ophthalmology Dec 2014Studies show great variability in the prevalence of hyperopia among children. This study aimed to synthesize the existing knowledge about hyperopia prevalence and its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Studies show great variability in the prevalence of hyperopia among children. This study aimed to synthesize the existing knowledge about hyperopia prevalence and its associated factors in school children and to explore the reasons for this variability.
METHODS
This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. Searching several international databases, the review included population- or school-based studies assessing hyperopia through cycloplegic autorefraction or cycloplegic retinoscopy. Meta-analysis of hyperopia prevalence was performed following MOOSE guidelines and using the random effects model.
RESULTS
The review included 40 cross-sectional studies. The prevalence of hyperopia ranged from 8.4% at age six, 2-3% from 9 to 14 years and approximately 1% at 15 years. With regard to associated factors, age has an inverse association with hyperopia. The frequency of hyperopia is higher among White children and those who live in rural areas. There is no consensus about the association between hyperopia and gender, family income and parental schooling.
CONCLUSION
Future studies should use standardized methods to classify hyperopia and sufficient sample size when evaluating age-specific prevalence. Furthermore, it is necessary to deepen the understanding about the interactions among hyperopic refractive error and accommodative and binocular functions as a way of identifying groups of hyperopic children at risk of developing visual, academic and even cognitive function sequelae.
Topics: Adolescent; Age Distribution; Child; Child, Preschool; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Hyperopia; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Sex Distribution
PubMed: 25539893
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2415-14-163 -
Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology... Jan 2022To assess the impact of uncorrected hyperopia and hyperopic spectacle correction on children's academic performance. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To assess the impact of uncorrected hyperopia and hyperopic spectacle correction on children's academic performance.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched 9 electronic databases from inception to July 26, 2021, for studies assessing associations between hyperopia and academic performance. There were no restrictions on language, publication date, or geographic location. A quality checklist was applied. Random-effects models estimated pooled effect size as a standardized mean difference (SMD) in 4 outcome domains: cognitive skills, educational performance, reading skills, and reading speed. (PROSPERO registration: CRD-42021268972).
RESULTS
Twenty-five studies (21 observational and 4 interventional) out of 3415 met the inclusion criteria. No full-scale randomized trials were identified. Meta-analyses of the 5 studies revealed a small but significant adverse effect on educational performance in uncorrected hyperopic compared to emmetropic children {SMD -0.18 [95% confidence interval (CI), -0.27 to -0.09]; P < 0.001, 4 studies} and a moderate negative effect on reading skills in uncorrected hyperopic compared to emmetropic children [SMD -0.46 (95% CI, -0.90 to -0.03); P = 0.036, 3 studies]. Reading skills were significantly worse in hyperopic than myopic children [SMD -0.29 (95% CI, -0.43 to -0.15); P < 0.001, 1 study]. Qualitative analysis on 10 (52.6%) of 19 studies excluded from meta-analysis found a significant (P < 0.05) association between uncorrected hyperopia and impaired academic performance. Two interventional studies found hyperopic spectacle correction significantly improved reading speed (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence indicates that uncorrected hyperopia is associated with poor academic performance. Given the limitations of current methodologies, further research is needed to evaluate the impact on academic performance of providing hyperopic correction.
Topics: Academic Performance; Child; Emmetropia; Eyeglasses; Humans; Hyperopia; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 35066525
DOI: 10.1097/APO.0000000000000492 -
Journal of Global Health 2021To investigate the prevalence and time trends of refractive error (RE) among Chinese children under 18 years old. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To investigate the prevalence and time trends of refractive error (RE) among Chinese children under 18 years old.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Web of Science were searched for articles that estimated prevalence of RE in Chinese children. Data of identified eligible studies was extracted by two investigators independently. Pooled prevalence of RE and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and the time trends of RE were investigated using Meta-analysis methods.
RESULTS
Of the 41 studies covering 1 051 784 subjects, the pooled prevalence of myopia, high myopia, hyperopia and astigmatism in Chinese children was 38.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 35.1%-41.1%), 2.8% (95% CI = 2.3%-3.4%), 5.2% (95% CI = 3.1%-8.6%) and 16.5% (95% CI = 12.3%-21.8%), respectively. Subgroup analysis show that children living in urban were at higher risk of RE. Prevalence of myopia and hyperopia were higher in Northern China compared with Southern China and high myopia and astigmatism were higher in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan than in mainland China. Regression analysis showed an upward trend in myopia and hyperopia and a downward trend in high myopia and astigmatism with years.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of RE is higher in urban areas than in rural for Chinese children. The much higher prevalence of myopia and astigmatism in China compared with foreign countries indicates the important role played by environment and genetic factors. Considering the large magnitude of refractive errors, much more attention should still be paid to RE prevention and treatment strategy development in China.
Topics: Child; China; Humans; Prevalence; Refractive Errors; Time Factors
PubMed: 34327000
DOI: 10.7189/jogh.11.08006 -
Vision (Basel, Switzerland) Feb 2023Refractive errors (myopia and hyperopia) are the most common visual disorders and are severe risk factors for secondary ocular pathologies. The development of refractive... (Review)
Review
Refractive errors (myopia and hyperopia) are the most common visual disorders and are severe risk factors for secondary ocular pathologies. The development of refractive errors has been shown to be associated with changes in ocular axial length, suggested to be induced by outer retinal elements. Thus, the present study systematically reviewed the literature examining retinal function as assessed using global flash electroretinograms (gfERGs) in human clinical refractive error populations. Electronic database searching via Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Psych INFO, and CINAHL retrieved 981 unique records (last searched on the 29 May 2022). Single case studies, samples with ocular comorbidities, drug trials, and reviews were excluded. Demographic characteristics, refractive state, gfERG protocol details, and waveform characteristics were extracted for the eight studies that met the inclusion criteria for the review and were judged to have acceptable risk of bias using the OHAT tool (total = 552 participants; age 7 to 50). Study synthesis suggests that myopia in humans involves attenuation of gfERG photoreceptor (a-wave) and bipolar cell (b-wave) function, consistent with the animal literature. Meaningful interpretation of the overall findings for hyperopia was limited by inconsistent reporting, highlighting the need for future studies to report key aspects of gfERG research design and outcomes more consistently for myopic and hyperopic refractive errors.
PubMed: 36977295
DOI: 10.3390/vision7010015 -
BMC Ophthalmology Nov 2023Refractive errors are one of the most common ocular conditions among children and adolescents, with myopia showing an increasing prevalence and early onset in this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Refractive errors are one of the most common ocular conditions among children and adolescents, with myopia showing an increasing prevalence and early onset in this population. Recent studies have identified a correlation between refractive errors and ocular biometric parameters.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Medline from January 1, 2012, to May 1, 2023. Various ocular biometric parameters were summarized under different refractive states, including axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), corneal curvature (CC), Corneal curvature radius (CR),axial length-to-corneal radius ratio (AL/CR ratio), choroidal thickness (ChT), retinal thickness (RT), retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFL), and retinal blood density (VD). The differences in these parameters among different refractive states were analyzed using Stata software with fixed or random-effects models, taking into account the assessed heterogeneity level.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included a total of 69 studies involving 128,178 eyes, including 48,795 emmetropic eyes, 60,691 myopic eyes, 13,983 hyperopic eyes, 2,040 low myopic eyes, 1,201 moderate myopic eyes, and 1,468 high myopic eyes. The results of our study demonstrated that, compared to the control group (emmetropic group), the myopic group and low, moderate, and high myopic groups showed significant increases in AL, AL/CR ratio, and ACD, while the hyperopic group exhibited significant decreases. Compared to the control group, the myopic group had a significantly increase for CC, while CR, CCT, perifoveal RT, subfoveal ChT, foveal ChT, parafoveal ChT, perifoveal (except nasal) ChT, and pRNFL (except temporal) significantly decreased. Compared to the control group, the hyperopic group had a significantly increase for subfoveal ChT, foveal ChT, parafoveal ChT, perifoveal ChT, and nasal pRNFL. Compared to the control group, the low and moderate myopic groups had a significantly decreases for the CCT, parafoveal RT (except nasal), perifoveal RT (except nasal), and pRNFL (except superior and temporal). Compared to the control group, the high myopic group had a significantly increase for CR, while LT, perifoveal ChT (except nasal), parafoveal RT, perifoveal RT, and pRNFL (except temporal) had significant decreased.
CONCLUSION
The changes of ocular biometric parameters in children and adolescents are closely related to refractive errors. Ocular biometric parameters devices, as effective non-invasive techniques, provide objective biological markers for monitoring refractive errors such as myopia.
Topics: Humans; Child; Adolescent; Tomography, Optical Coherence; Refractive Errors; Myopia; Retina; Refraction, Ocular; Hyperopia; Biometry
PubMed: 37990308
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-023-03222-7 -
PloS One 2014To summarize relevant evidence investigating the associations between refractive error and age-related macular degeneration (AMD). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To summarize relevant evidence investigating the associations between refractive error and age-related macular degeneration (AMD).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases as well as the reference lists of retrieved articles to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. Extracted data were combined using a random-effects meta-analysis. Studies that were pertinent to our topic but did not meet the criteria for quantitative analysis were reported in a systematic review instead.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between refractive error (hyperopia, myopia, per-diopter increase in spherical equivalent [SE] toward hyperopia, per-millimeter increase in axial length [AL]) and AMD (early and late, prevalent and incident).
RESULTS
Fourteen studies comprising over 5800 patients were eligible. Significant associations were found between hyperopia, myopia, per-diopter increase in SE, per-millimeter increase in AL, and prevalent early AMD. The pooled ORs and 95% CIs were 1.13 (1.06-1.20), 0.75 (0.56-0.94), 1.10 (1.07-1.14), and 0.79 (0.73-0.85), respectively. The per-diopter increase in SE was also significantly associated with early AMD incidence (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10). However, no significant association was found between hyperopia or myopia and early AMD incidence. Furthermore, neither prevalent nor incident late AMD was associated with refractive error. Considerable heterogeneity was found among studies investigating the association between myopia and prevalent early AMD (P = 0.001, I2 = 72.2%). Geographic location might play a role; the heterogeneity became non-significant after stratifying these studies into Asian and non-Asian subgroups.
CONCLUSION
Refractive error is associated with early AMD but not with late AMD. More large-scale longitudinal studies are needed to further investigate such associations.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Female; Humans; Incidence; Macular Degeneration; Male; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Prevalence; Refractive Errors; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 24603619
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090897