The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Heritability of Refractive Error and Ocular Biometrics: The Genes in Myopia (GEM) Twin Study
Abstract
PURPOSE: A classic twin study was undertaken to assess the contribution of genes and environment to the development of refractive errors and ocular biometrics in a twin population. METHODS: A total of 1224 twins (345 monozygotic [MZ] and 267 dizygotic [DZ] twin pairs) aged between 18 and 88 years were examined. All twins completed a questionnaire consisting of a medical history, education, and zygosity. Objective refraction was measured in all twins, and biometric measurements were obtained using partial coherence interferometry. RESULTS: Intrapair correlations for spherical equivalent and ocular biometrics were significantly higher in the MZ than in the DZ twin pairs (P < 0.05), when refraction was considered as a continuous variable. A significant gender difference in the variation of spherical equivalent and ocular biometrics was found (P < 0.05). A genetic model specifying an additive, dominant, and unique environmental factor that was sex limited was the best fit for all measured variables. Heritability of spherical equivalents of 88% and 75% were found in the men and women, respectively, whereas, that of axial length was 94% and 92%, respectively. Additive genetic effects accounted for a greater proportion of the variance in spherical equivalent, whereas the variance in ocular biometrics, particularly axial length was explained mostly by dominant genetic effects. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic factors, both additive and dominant, play a significant role in refractive error (myopia and hypermetropia) as well as in ocular biometrics, particularly axial length. The sex limitation ADE model (additive genetic, nonadditive genetic, and environmental components) provided the best-fit genetic model for all parameters.
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
IMI – Report on Experimental Models of Emmetropization and Myopia
Troilo, D., Smith, E. L., Nickla, D. L., Ashby, R., Tkatchenko, A. V., Ostrin, L. A., Gawne, T. J., Pardue, M. T., Summers, J. A., Kee, C.-S., et al. (2019) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.18-25967 · Cited by 487
Effect of Dual-Focus Soft Contact Lens Wear on Axial Myopia Progression in Children
Anstice, N. S., & Phillips, J. R. (2011) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.10.035 · Cited by 422
Tedja, M. S., Haarman, A. E. G., Meester-Smoor, M. A., Kaprio, J., Mackey, D. A., Guggenheim, J. A., Hammond, C. J., Verhoeven, V. J. M., Klaver, C. C. W., & for the CREAM Consortium (2019) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.18-25965 · Cited by 304
A Review of Current Concepts of the Etiology and Treatment of Myopia
Cooper, J., & Tkatchenko, A. V. (2018) · Eye & Contact Lens: Science & Clinical Practice · doi:10.1097/icl.0000000000000499 · Cited by 293
Functional craniology and brain evolution: from paleontology to biomedicine
Bruner, E., de la Cuétara, J. M., Masters, M., Amano, H., & Ogihara, N. (2014) · Frontiers in Neuroanatomy · doi:10.3389/fnana.2014.00019 · Cited by 87
Metadata
- Authors
- Dirani, M., Chamberlain, M., Shekar, S. N., Islam, A. F. M., Garoufalis, P., Chen, C. Y., Guymer, R. H., & Baird, P. N.
- Venue
- Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
- Published
- 2006-11-01
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 4756
- ISSN
- 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-5783
- OpenAlex
- W1991211280
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 8.85
- 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: Heritability of Refractive Error and Ocular Biometrics: The Genes in Myopia (GEM) Twin Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1167/iovs.06-0270
- The paper
- Dirani, M., Chamberlain, M., Shekar, S. N., Islam, A. F. M., Garoufalis, P., Chen, C. Y., Guymer, R. H., & Baird, P. N. (2006). Heritability of Refractive Error and Ocular Biometrics: The Genes in Myopia (GEM) Twin Study. Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.06-0270
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.