The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The increasing prevalence of myopia and high myopia among high school students in Fenghua city, eastern China: a 15-year population-based survey
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Myopia is the leading cause of preventable blindness in children and young adults. Multiple epidemiological studies have confirmed a high prevalence of myopia in Asian countries. However, fewer longitudinal studies have been performed to evaluate the secular changes in the prevalence of myopia, especially high myopia in China. In the present study, we investigated trends in the prevalence of myopia among high school students in Fenghua city, eastern China, from 2001 to 2015. METHODS: This was a population-based, retrospective study. Data were collected among 43,858 third-year high school students. Noncycloplegic autorefraction was used to determine refractive error, which was defined as low myopia, moderate myopia, high myopia and very high myopia according to the spherical equivalent from the worse eye of each participant. The prevalence of myopia was calculated and the annual percentage change (APC) was used to quantify the time trends. All analyses were conducted using the SPSS, Stata and Graphpad Prism software. RESULTS: From 2001 to 2015, the prevalence of overall myopia increased from 79.5% to 87.7% (APC =0.59%), with a significant increase of moderate myopia (38.8% to 45.7%, APC = 0.78%), high myopia (7.9% to 16.6%, APC = 5.48%) and very high myopia (0.08% to 0.92%, APC = 14.59%), while the prevalence of low myopia decreased from 32.7% to 24.4% (APC = - 1.73%). High myopia and very high myopia contributed the major part of the increasing trend of myopia prevalence (contribution rate 27.00% and 69.07%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: During the 15-year period, there was a remarkable increase in the prevalence of high and very high myopia among high school students, which might become a serious public health problem in China for the next few decades.
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
Cites
Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: An update
DerSimonian, R., & Kacker, R. (2007) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2006.04.004 · Cited by 2,374
Cited by
Sankaridurg, P., Tahhan, N., Kandel, H., Naduvilath, T., Zou, H., Frick, K. D., Marmamula, S., Friedman, D. S., Lamoureux, E., Keeffe, J., et al. (2021) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.62.5.2 · Cited by 435
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, M., Wu, A., Zhang, L., Wang, W., Chen, X., Yu, X., & Wang, K.
- Venue
- BMC Ophthalmology
- Published
- 2018-07-03
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 159-159
- ISSN
- 1471-2415 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2810648779
- Cited by
- 197
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: The increasing prevalence of myopia and high myopia among high school students in Fenghua city, eastern China: a 15-year population-based survey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12886-018-0829-8
- The paper
- Chen, M., Wu, A., Zhang, L., Wang, W., Chen, X., Yu, X., & Wang, K. (2018). The increasing prevalence of myopia and high myopia among high school students in Fenghua city, eastern China: a 15-year population-based survey. BMC Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-018-0829-8
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.