The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Refractive error and visual impairment in school children in Northern Ireland
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Background Discrimination has been identified as an important determinant of negative mental health outcomes. This study determined the association between the experience of COVID-19-related discrimination and psychological distress among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Japan. Methods This cross-sectional study conducted a health survey among 5,703 HCWs of six national medical and research centers in Japan from October 2020 to March 2021. COVID-19-related discrimination was defined either when participants or their family members were badmouthed or when they felt discriminated against in some way. We used the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) to assess the presence of severe psychological distress (≥13 points). We used logistic regression models to examine the association between discrimination and psychological distress. We also identified job-related factors associated with discrimination. Results Of the participants, 484 (8.4%) reported COVID-19-related discrimination and 486 (8.5%) had severe psychological distress. HCWs who were female vs. male (odds ratio [OR]=1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.28-1.55), had high vs. low viral exposure (OR=2.31, 95%CI=1.81-2.93), and worked for more than 10 hours/day vs. <8 hours/day (OR=1.42, 95%CI=1.35-1.49) were more likely to have experienced COVID-19-related discrimination. The OR (95%CI) of severe psychological distress was 1.83 (1.29-2.59) among those who experienced discrimination. The analysis was stratified by sociodemographic and job-related factors and the associations trended in the same direction across subgroups. Conclusion Experience of COVID-19-related discrimination was associated with severe psychological distress among HCWs. During the pandemic, effective measures should be taken to prevent the development of negative mental health outcomes in HCWs who experience discrimination.
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
Near-Work Activity, Night-lights, and Myopia in the Singapore-China Study
Saw, S.-M. (2002) · Archives of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1001/archopht.120.5.620 · Cited by 214
Cited by
Sankaridurg, P., Tahhan, N., Kandel, H., Naduvilath, T., Zou, H., Frick, K. D., Marmamula, S., Friedman, D. S., Lamoureux, E., Keeffe, J., et al. (2021) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.62.5.2 · Cited by 435
Wu, P.-C., Huang, H.-M., Yu, H.-J., Fang, P.-C., & Chen, C.-T. (2016) · Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1097/apo.0000000000000236 · Cited by 357
McCullough, S. J., O’Donoghue, L., & Saunders, K. J. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0146332 · Cited by 147
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- O'Donoghue, L., McClelland, J. F., Logan, N. S., Rudnicka, A. R., Owen, C. G., & Saunders, K. J.
- Venue
- British Journal of Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2010-05-21
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1155-1159
- ISSN
- 0007-1161 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2154638192
- Cited by
- 171
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Refractive error and visual impairment in school children in Northern Ireland. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bjo.2009.176040
- The paper
- O'Donoghue, L., McClelland, J. F., Logan, N. S., Rudnicka, A. R., Owen, C. G., & Saunders, K. J. (2010). Refractive error and visual impairment in school children in Northern Ireland. British Journal of Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2009.176040
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.