The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Global and regional estimates of prevalence of refractive errors: Systematic review and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
The aim of the study was a systematic review of refractive errors across the world according to the WHO regions. 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). 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%) (P = 0.097). 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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
Global estimates of visual impairment: 2010
Pascolini, D., & Mariotti, S. P. (2012) · British Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2011-300539 · Cited by 3,763
He, M., Xiang, F., Zeng, Y., Mai, J., Chen, Q., Zhang, J., Smith, W., Rose, K., & Morgan, I. G. (2015) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2015.10803 · Cited by 1,076
Dolgin, E. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/519276a · Cited by 967
Worldwide prevalence and risk factors for myopia
Pan, C., Ramamurthy, D., & Saw, S. (2012) · Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics · doi:10.1111/j.1475-1313.2011.00884.x · Cited by 899
Refractive Error and Visual Impairment in Urban Children in Southern China
He, M., Zeng, J., Liu, Y., Xu, J., Pokharel, G. P., & Ellwein, L. B. (2004) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.03-1051 · Cited by 788
Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore.
Wong, T. Y., Foster, P. J., Hee, J., Ng, T. P., Tielsch, J. M., Chew, S., Johnson, G. J., & Seah, S. K. W. (2000) · PubMed · Cited by 722
Rudnicka, A. R., Kapetanakis, V. V., Wathern, A. K., Logan, N. S., Gilmartin, B., Whincup, P. H., Cook, D. G., & Owen, C. G. (2016) · British Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307724 · Cited by 610
Metadata
- Authors
- Hashemi, H., Fotouhi, A., Yekta, A., Pakzad, R., Ostadimoghaddam, H., & Khabazkhoob, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Current Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- Medknow
- Published
- 2018-03
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-22
- ISSN
- 2452-2325 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2758013269
- Cited by
- 585
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 3.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Global and regional estimates of prevalence of refractive errors: Systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.joco.2017.08.009
- The paper
- Hashemi, H., Fotouhi, A., Yekta, A., Pakzad, R., Ostadimoghaddam, H., & Khabazkhoob, M. (2018). Global and regional estimates of prevalence of refractive errors: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Current Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joco.2017.08.009
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
