The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Acanthamoeba keratitis in England and Wales: incidence, outcome, and risk factors
Open accessAbstract
AIM: To determine the incidence, regional variation in frequency, outcome, and risk factors for acanthamoeba keratitis (AK) in England and Wales. METHODS: AK cases presenting from 1 October 1997 to 30 September 1999 were identified by the British Ophthalmic Surveillance Unit active reporting system. Clinical and patient postal questionnaire data were analysed. RESULTS: 106 reported cases met study criteria. The annual incidence for the 2 years was 1.26 and 1.13 per million adults and, for contact lens (CL) wearers, 21.14 and 17.53 per million. There was marked regional variation in incidence (0 to 85.13 per million adult CL wearers), with CL wearers in the south having a ninefold increased risk of AK compared with those resident in the north (95% confidence limits: 2.2-38.9, p<0.0001), and a threefold increased risk with hard as opposed to soft domestic water (95% confidence limits: 1.73 to 6.58, p<0.001). Treatment and outcome data were similar to those previously reported. 93/106 (88%) patients were CL wearers. Among these, 46/77 (60%) were disinfecting irregularly, and 20/63 (32%) had been swimming in CLs. One step hydrogen peroxide and chlorine release soft CL (SCL) disinfection systems were significantly over-represented among the cases. Among SCL users, one or more previously established risk factors for AK were identified in 50/55 (91%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence was considerably higher than most previous estimates, and was static. The geographical variation in incidence may be partly related to the increase in risk associated with hard water. The fact that water quality can have such an effect on the risk of AK suggests that many CL wearers must be letting tapwater come into contact with their lenses or storage cases. Improved education for CL wearers and practitioners about hygiene practice and the variable efficacy of contact lens systems could be expected to reduce the incidence of this disease.
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
Incidence of contact-lens-associated microbial keratitis and its related morbidity
Cheng, K. H., Leung, S. L., Hoekman, H. W., Beekhuis, W. H., Mulder, P. G., Geerards, A. J., & Kijlstra, A. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)09385-4 · Cited by 611
Population-based cohort study of microbial keratitis in Scotland: incidence and features
Seal, D. V., Kirkness, C. M., Bennett, H. G. B., & Peterson, M. (1999) · Contact Lens and Anterior Eye · doi:10.1016/s1367-0484(99)80003-4 · Cited by 172
The British Paediatric Surveillance Unit.
Hall, S. M., & Glickman, M. (1988) · Archives of Disease in Childhood · doi:10.1136/adc.63.3.344 · Cited by 108
Cited by
Acanthamoeba Keratitis: Diagnosis and Treatment Update 2009
Dart, J. K. G., Saw, V. P. J., & Kilvington, S. (2009) · American Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2009.06.009 · Cited by 503
Pan, H., & Wu, X. (2012) · Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications · doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2012.03.069 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Radford, C. F.
- Venue
- British Journal of Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2002-05-01
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 536-542
- ISSN
- 0007-1161 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2154084947
- Cited by
- 384
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 19.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Acanthamoeba keratitis in England and Wales: incidence, outcome, and risk factors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bjo.86.5.536
- The paper
- Radford, C. F. (2002). Acanthamoeba keratitis in England and Wales: incidence, outcome, and risk factors. British Journal of Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.86.5.536
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.