The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Effect of Ambient Illuminance on the Development of Deprivation Myopia in Chicks
Abstract
PURPOSE: Recent epidemiologic studies have shown that children who spend a higher proportion of time outdoors are less likely to develop myopia. This study was undertaken to investigate whether light levels may be a relevant factor in the development of myopia. METHODS; Paradigm 1: Chicks were fitted with translucent diffusers for 5 days, with the diffusers removed daily for 15 minutes under one of three lighting conditions: (1) normal laboratory lighting (500 lux), (2) intense laboratory lighting (15,000 lux), or (3) daylight (30,000 lux). A control group, which continuously wore diffusers, was also kept under an illumination of 500 lux. Paradigm 2: Chicks fitted with translucent diffusers were raised for 4 days under one of three lighting conditions: (1) low laboratory lighting (50 lux, n = 9), (2) normal laboratory lighting (500 lux, n = 18), or (3) intense laboratory lights (15,000 lux, n = 9). In groups 1 and 3, the chicks were exposed to either low or high ambient illuminances for a period of 6 hours per day (10 AM-4 PM), but were kept under 500 lux for the remaining time of the light phase. Axial length and refraction were measured at the commencement and cessation of all treatments, with corneal curvature measured additionally in paradigm 2. RESULTS: Paradigm 1: The chicks exposed daily to sunlight for 15 minutes had significantly shorter eyes (8.81 +/- 0.05 mm; P < 0.01) and less myopic refractions (-1.1 +/- 0.45 D; P < 0.01) than did the chicks that had their diffusers removed under normal laboratory light levels (8.98 +/- 0.03 mm, -5.3 +/- 0.5 D). If the diffusers were removed under intense laboratory lights, the chicks also developed shorter eyes (8.88 +/- 0.04 mm; P < 0.01) and less myopic refractions (-3.4 +/- 0.6D; P < 0.01). Paradigm 2: The chicks that wore diffusers continuously under high illuminance had shorter eyes (8.54 +/- 0.02 mm; P < 0.01) and less myopic refractions (+0.04 +/- 0.7D; P < 0.001) compared with those chicks reared under normal light levels (8.64 +/- 0.06 mm, -5.3 +/- 0.9 D). Low illuminance (50 lux) did not further increase deprivation myopia. CONCLUSIONS: Exposing chicks to high illuminances, either sunlight or intense laboratory lights, retards the development of experimental myopia. These results, in conjunction with recent epidemiologic findings, suggest that daily exposure to high light levels may have a protective effect against the development of school-age myopia in children.
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
The epidemics of myopia: Aetiology and prevention
Morgan, I. G., French, A. N., Ashby, R. S., Guo, X., Ding, X., He, M., & Rose, K. A. (2018) · Progress in Retinal and Eye Research · doi:10.1016/j.preteyeres.2017.09.004 · Cited by 1,310
Self-citationOutdoor Activity during Class Recess Reduces Myopia Onset and Progression in School Children
Wu, P.-C., Tsai, C.-L., Wu, H.-L., Yang, Y.-H., & Kuo, H.-K. (2013) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.11.009 · Cited by 688
Hashemi, H., Fotouhi, A., Yekta, A., Pakzad, R., Ostadimoghaddam, H., & Khabazkhoob, M. (2018) · Journal of Current Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.joco.2017.08.009 · Cited by 585
Myopia Prevention and Outdoor Light Intensity in a School-Based Cluster Randomized Trial
Wu, P.-C., Chen, C.-T., Lin, K.-K., Sun, C.-C., Kuo, C.-N., Huang, H.-M., Poon, Y.-C., Yang, M.-L., Chen, C.-Y., Huang, J.-C., et al. (2018) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.12.011 · Cited by 574
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
Self-citationIMI – Interventions for Controlling Myopia Onset and Progression Report
Wildsoet, C. F., Chia, A., Cho, P., Guggenheim, J. A., Polling, J. R., Read, S., Sankaridurg, P., Saw, S.-M., Trier, K., Walline, J. J., et al. (2019) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.18-25958 · Cited by 462
Time outdoors and the prevention of myopia
French, A. N., Ashby, R. S., Morgan, I. G., & Rose, K. A. (2013) · Experimental Eye Research · doi:10.1016/j.exer.2013.04.018 · Cited by 395
Self-citationWu, P.-C., Huang, H.-M., Yu, H.-J., Fang, P.-C., & Chen, C.-T. (2016) · Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1097/apo.0000000000000236 · Cited by 357
The Effect of Bright Light on Lens Compensation in Chicks
Ashby, R. S., & Schaeffel, F. (2010) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.09-4689 · Cited by 310
Self-citationA 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
Circadian rhythms, refractive development, and myopia
Chakraborty, R., Ostrin, L. A., Nickla, D. L., Iuvone, P. M., Pardue, M. T., & Stone, R. A. (2018) · Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics · doi:10.1111/opo.12453 · Cited by 235
Mutations in LRPAP1 Are Associated with Severe Myopia in Humans
Aldahmesh, M. A., Khan, A. O., Alkuraya, H., Adly, N., Anazi, S., Al-Saleh, A. A., Mohamed, J. Y., Hijazi, H., Prabakaran, S., Tacke, M., et al. (2013) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.06.002 · Cited by 105
Metadata
- Authors
- Ashby, R., Ohlendorf, A., & Schaeffel, F.
- Venue
- Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
- Published
- 2009-11-01
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 5348
- ISSN
- 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-5783
- OpenAlex
- W2051961090
- Cited by
- 371
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.20
- 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
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.