Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMC Ophthalmol. 2014 Dec 23;14:163. doi: 10.1186/1471-2415-14-163.

Hyperopia: a meta-analysis of prevalence and a review of associated factors among school-aged children.

Author information

1
Department of Specialized Medicine - Ophthalmology, Federal University of Pelotas, Rua Marechal Deodoro, 1160, Centro, 96020-220, Pelotas, RS, Brazil. vicastagno@hotmail.com.
2
Department of Social Medicine, Rua Marechal Deodoro, 1160, Centro, 96020-220, Pelotas, RS, Brazil. anaclaudia.fassa@gmail.com.
3
Department of Social Medicine, Federal University of Pelotas, Avenida Duque de Caxias, 250, Fragata, 96001-970, Pelotas, RS, Brazil. mvcarret@hotmail.com.
4
Department of Specialized Medicine - Ophthalmology, Federal University of Pelotas, Rua Marechal Deodoro, 1160, Centro, 96020-220, Pelotas, RS, Brazil. mapvilela@gmail.com.
5
Department of Social Medicine, Federal University of Pelotas, Avenida Duque de Caxias, 250, Fragata, 96001-970, Pelotas, RS, Brazil. rodrigodalke@gmail.com.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Studies show great variability in the prevalence of hyperopia among children. This study aimed to synthesize the existing knowledge about hyperopia prevalence and its associated factors in school children and to explore the reasons for this variability.

METHODS:

This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. Searching several international databases, the review included population- or school-based studies assessing hyperopia through cycloplegic autorefraction or cycloplegic retinoscopy. Meta-analysis of hyperopia prevalence was performed following MOOSE guidelines and using the random effects model.

RESULTS:

The review included 40 cross-sectional studies. The prevalence of hyperopia ranged from 8.4% at age six, 2-3% from 9 to 14 years and approximately 1% at 15 years. With regard to associated factors, age has an inverse association with hyperopia. The frequency of hyperopia is higher among White children and those who live in rural areas. There is no consensus about the association between hyperopia and gender, family income and parental schooling.

CONCLUSION:

Future studies should use standardized methods to classify hyperopia and sufficient sample size when evaluating age-specific prevalence. Furthermore, it is necessary to deepen the understanding about the interactions among hyperopic refractive error and accommodative and binocular functions as a way of identifying groups of hyperopic children at risk of developing visual, academic and even cognitive function sequelae.

PMID:
25539893
PMCID:
PMC4391667
DOI:
10.1186/1471-2415-14-163
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center