Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 218

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Heritability of Refractive Error and Ocular Biometrics: The Genes in Myopia (GEM) Twin Study

Dirani, Mohamed, Chamberlain, Matthew, Shekar, Sri N., Islam, Amirul F. M., Garoufalis, Pam, Chen, Christine Y., Guymer, Robyn H., Baird, Paul N.·2006·Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/iovs.06-0270

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.

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

Cited by

See all 218

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.