Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 788

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Refractive Error and Visual Impairment in Urban Children in Southern China

He, Mingguang, Zeng, Junwen, Liu, Yizhi, Xu, Jingjing, Pokharel, Gopal P., Ellwein, Leon B.·2004·Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the prevalence of refractive error and visual impairment in school-age children in a metropolitan area of southern China. METHODS: Random selection of geographically defined clusters was used to identify children 5 to 15 years of age in Guangzhou. Children in 22 clusters were enumerated through a door-to-door survey and examined in 71 schools and 19 community facilities from October 2002 to January 2003. The examination included visual acuity measurements, ocular motility evaluation, retinoscopy, and autorefraction under cycloplegia and examination of the external eye, anterior segment, media, and fundus. RESULTS: A total of 5053 children living in 4814 households were enumerated, and 4364 (86.4%) were examined. The prevalence of uncorrected, presenting, and best-corrected visual acuity 20/40 or worse in the better eye was 22.3%, 10.3%, and 0.62%, respectively. Refractive error was the cause in 94.9% of the 2335 eyes with reduced vision, amblyopia in 1.9%, other causes in 0.4%, and unexplained causes in the remaining 2.8%. External and anterior segment abnormalities were seen in 1496 (34.3%) children, mainly minor conjunctival abnormalities. Media and fundus abnormalities were observed in 32 (0.73%) children. Myopia (spherical equivalent of at least -0.50 D in either eye) measured with retinoscopy affected 73.1% of children 15 years of age, 78.4% with autorefraction. The prevalence of myopia was 3.3% in 5-year-olds with retinoscopy and 5.7% with autorefraction. Females had a significantly higher risk of myopia. Hyperopia (+2.00 D or more) measured with retinoscopy was present in 16.7% of 5-year-olds, 17.0% with autorefraction. The prevalence of hyperopia was below 1% in 15-year-olds, with both methods. Astigmatism (cylinder of > or = 0.75 D) was present in 33.6% of children with retinoscopy and in 42.7% with autorefraction. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of reduced vision because of myopia is high in school-age children living in metropolitan Guangzhou, representing an important public health problem. One third of these children do not have the necessary corrective spectacles. Effective strategies are needed to eliminate this easily treated cause of significant visual impairment.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/iovs.03-1051

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 788

Metadata

Authors
He, M., Zeng, J., Liu, Y., Xu, J., Pokharel, G. P., & Ellwein, L. B.
Venue
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
Published
2004-03-01
Volume
45
Issue
3
Pages
793
ISSN
  • 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5783
OpenAlex
W2034644592
Cited by
788
References
12
FWCI
11.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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 Urban Children in Southern China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1167/iovs.03-1051
The paper
He, M., Zeng, J., Liu, Y., Xu, J., Pokharel, G. P., & Ellwein, L. B. (2004). Refractive Error and Visual Impairment in Urban Children in Southern China. Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.03-1051

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.