The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prevalence of Open-Angle Glaucoma in a Rural South Indian Population
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and the associated risk factors in a rural population in southern India. METHODS: Subjects aged 40 years or more (n = 3934) underwent a complete ophthalmic examination. Glaucoma was diagnosed according to the International Society of Geographical and Epidemiologic Ophthalmology classification. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 3924 subjects (response rate, 81.75%). In eyes with normal suprathreshold visual fields, the mean intraocular pressure was 14.29 +/- 3.32 mm Hg (97.5th and 99.5th percentiles, 21 and 25 mm Hg, respectively). The mean vertical cup-to-disc ratio was 0.39 +/- 0.17 (97.5th and 99.5th percentiles, 0.7 and 0.8, respectively). Sixty-four subjects had definite POAG (1.62%, 9.5% CI 1.42-1.82); 30 were men and 34 were women. Subjects with POAG (59.85 +/- 10.43 years) were older (P < 0.001) than the study population (53.78 +/- 10.71 years). In only one (1.5%) person was POAG diagnosed before the study. Two (3.12%) subjects were blind due to POAG; 21 (32.81%) subjects had a presenting IOP >21 mm Hg, and 43 (67.19%) had an IOP <21 mm Hg. The mean central corneal thickness in subjects with POAG (502.82 +/- 35.29 microm) was not different from that of the normal study population (505.93 +/- 31.11 microm). No association was found with diabetes mellitus, systemic hypertension, gender, and myopia. Increasing IOP (per mm Hg) was associated with the disease (OR 1.12; 95% CI, 1.08-1.16). The odds for POAG increased with advancing age after adjustment for gender. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of POAG in this population was 1.62%. The prevalence increased with age, and 98.5% were not aware of the 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
Cited by
Global Prevalence of Glaucoma and Projections of Glaucoma Burden through 2040
Tham, Y.-C., Li, X., Wong, T. Y., Quigley, H. A., Aung, T., & Cheng, C.-Y. (2014) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013 · Cited by 7,159
Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Preferred Practice Pattern®
Gedde, S. J., Vinod, K., Wright, M. M., Muir, K. W., Lind, J. T., Chen, P. P., Li, T., & Mansberger, S. L. (2021) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.10.022 · Cited by 474
Zhang, N., Wang, J., Li, Y., & Jiang, B. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-92971-w · Cited by 353
The Prevalence and Types of Glaucoma in Malay People: The Singapore Malay Eye Study
Shen, S. Y., Wong, T. Y., Foster, P. J., Loo, J.-L., Rosman, M., Loon, S.-C., Wong, W. L., Saw, S.-M., & Aung, T. (2008) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.08-1759 · Cited by 279
Metadata
- Authors
- Vijaya, L., George, R., Paul, P. G., Baskaran, M., Arvind, H., Raju, P., Ramesh, S. V., Kumaramanickavel, G., & McCarty, C.
- Venue
- Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
- Published
- 2005-12-01
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 4461
- ISSN
- 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-5783
- OpenAlex
- W1976656431
- Cited by
- 183
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.11
- 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: Prevalence of Open-Angle Glaucoma in a Rural South Indian Population. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1167/iovs.04-1529
- The paper
- Vijaya, L., George, R., Paul, P. G., Baskaran, M., Arvind, H., Raju, P., Ramesh, S. V., Kumaramanickavel, G., & McCarty, C. (2005). Prevalence of Open-Angle Glaucoma in a Rural South Indian Population. Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.04-1529
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.