Literature DB >> 12598451

Utility values and myopia in teenage school students.

S-M Saw1, G Gazzard, K-G Au Eong, D Koh.   

Abstract

AIM: To ascertain the utility values of myopic teenage students in Singapore.
METHODS: Children (n=699) aged 15-18 years with myopia (spherical equivalent (SE) at least -0.5 dioptres (D)) in two high schools in Singapore were recruited. Information on time trade-off (years of life willing to sacrifice for treatment of myopia) and standard gamble for blindness (risk of blindness from therapy willing to sacrifice for treatment of myopia) utility values, demographic, and socioeconomic status data were obtained.
RESULTS: The time trade-off and standard gamble for blindness utility values were 0.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 0.94) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.86), respectively. Children with presenting better eye logMAR visual acuity >0.3 had lower time trade-off utility values (mean 0.92 versus mean 0.94), after adjusting for race and sex. There were dose-response relations between standard gamble for blindness values and total family income, as well as both utility values and educational stream (all p values for trend <0.01), after controlling for the same factors.
CONCLUSION: The utility values in myopic students were higher for teenagers with better presenting visual acuity, children who wore spectacles or contact lenses, higher total family income, more "academic" schooling stream, and who were non-Muslims.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12598451      PMCID: PMC1771541          DOI: 10.1136/bjo.87.3.341

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0007-1161            Impact factor:   4.638


  13 in total

1.  Does education explain ethnic differences in myopia prevalence? A population-based study of young adult males in Singapore.

Authors:  H M Wu; B Seet; E P Yap; S M Saw; T H Lim; K S Chia
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 1.973

2.  Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore.

Authors:  T Y Wong; P J Foster; J Hee; T P Ng; J M Tielsch; S J Chew; G J Johnson; S K Seah
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Utility values and age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  G C Brown; S Sharma; M M Brown; J Kistler
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-01

4.  Vision and quality-of-life.

Authors:  G C Brown
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  1999

5.  The socioeconomic aspects of laser refractive surgery.

Authors:  J C Javitt; Y P Chiang
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1994-12

6.  Utility values associated with blindness in an adult population.

Authors:  M M Brown; G C Brown; S Sharma; J Kistler; H Brown
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 4.638

7.  Peripheral retinal changes and axial myopia.

Authors:  L Pierro; F I Camesasca; M Mischi; R Brancato
Journal:  Retina       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.256

8.  Quality of life in myopia.

Authors:  K Rose; R Harper; C Tromans; C Waterman; D Goldberg; C Haggerty; A Tullo
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.638

9.  The relationship between glaucoma and myopia: the Blue Mountains Eye Study.

Authors:  P Mitchell; F Hourihan; J Sandbach; J J Wang
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 12.079

10.  Risk factors for idiopathic rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. The Eye Disease Case-Control Study Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1993-04-01       Impact factor: 4.897

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Defining myopia using refractive error and uncorrected logMAR visual acuity >0.3 from 1334 Singapore school children ages 7-9 years.

Authors:  H-D Luo; G Gazzard; Y Liang; A Shankar; D T H Tan; S-M Saw
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Quality of life and congenital heart defects: comparing parent and professional values.

Authors:  Rachel L Knowles; Ingolf Griebsch; Catherine Bull; Jacqueline Brown; Christopher Wren; Carol Dezateux
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 3.791

3.  Is the pediatric quality of life inventory valid for use in preschool children with refractive errors?

Authors:  Ecosse L Lamoureux; Manjula Marella; Benjamin Chang; Mohamed Dirani; Au Eong Kah-Guan; Audrey Chia; Terry L Young; Tien Y Wong; Seang Mei Saw
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.973

4.  Glucagon-related peptides in the mouse retina and the effects of deprivation of form vision.

Authors:  Ute Mathis; Frank Schaeffel
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Exploring the Issues of Valuing Child and Adolescent Health States Using a Mixed Sample of Adolescents and Adults.

Authors:  Donna Rowen; Clara Mukuria; Philip A Powell; Allan Wailoo
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Preference Elicitation Techniques Used in Valuing Children's Health-Related Quality-of-Life: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Cate Bailey; Martin Howell; Kirsten Howard; Rosalie Viney; Rakhee Raghunandan; Amber Salisbury; Gang Chen; Joanna Coast; Jonathan C Craig; Nancy J Devlin; Elisabeth Huynh; Emily Lancsar; Brendan J Mulhern; Richard Norman; Stavros Petrou; Julie Ratcliffe; Deborah J Street
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 4.558

7.  The differences in level of trait anxiety among girls and boys aged 13-17 years with myopia and emmetropia.

Authors:  Joanna B Łazarczyk; Beata Urban; Beata Konarzewska; Agata Szulc; Alina Bakunowicz-Łazarczyk; Ewa Żmudzka; Urszula Kowzan; Napoleon Waszkiewicz; Karolina Juszczyk-Zajkowska
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 2.209

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.