Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Dec;39(12):1315-1324.
doi: 10.1007/s10654-024-01163-z. Epub 2024 Dec 11.

Gender issues in myopia: a changing paradigm in generations

Clair A Enthoven  1   2   3 , Annechien E G Haarman  1   3 , Joanna Swierkowska-Janc  1   3   4 , J Willem L Tideman  1   3   5 , Jan Roelof Polling  1   6 , Hein Raat  7 , Virginie J M Verhoeven  1   8 , Jeremy Labrecque  3 , Caroline C W Klaver  9   10   11   12
Affiliations

Gender issues in myopia: a changing paradigm in generations

Clair A Enthoven et al. Eur J Epidemiol. 2024 Dec.

Abstract

Myopia is becoming an important cause of visual impairment. Determining risk profiles will help to develop targeted prevention strategies. This study aims to explore the difference in myopia development between genders in two cohorts representing different generations, and to assess whether hypothetical interventions targeting education or lifestyle factors would reduce a gender gap. This study included two Dutch population-based cohorts; 11,109 adults aged ≥ 45 years from the Rotterdam Study I-III born between 1887 and 1960, and 7229 children from the birth cohort Generation R study born between 2002 and 2006 at age 9-13 years. Sequential G-estimation was used to estimate changes in gender-specific myopia prevalence, incidence and spherical equivalent if hypothetical interventions such as education and lifestyle changes would have been implemented. Myopia prevalence was 32.3% in men and 29.3% in women in the generation born between 1887 and 1960 (0.23 dioptre difference in spherical equivalent; p < 0.001); while this prevalence was 20.2% in boys and 24.7% in girls born between 2002 and 2006 at age 13 (0.15 dioptre difference in spherical equivalent; p = 0.02). In the older generation, hypothetically intervening to lower education reduced the difference between genders by -52.4% (-108.0%; -13.2%) for spherical equivalent and - 53.0% (-112.0%; -11.6%) for myopia. In children, hypothetically intervening on reducing reading time (-50.0%, 95%CI=-267.5%; 33.8% for spherical equivalent) and number of books read/week (-76.8%, 95% CI=-349.9%; 20.2% for spherical equivalent) was most prominent, but not statistically significant. The results show that men had a higher prevalence of myopia in our study of older generations; while girls had a higher prevalence in the young generation. Our hypothetical interventions suggest that these generation-specific gender preponderances were largely due to education and, possibly, lifestyle factors in youth.

Keywords: Education; Gender; Hypothetical intervention; Lifestyle; Myopia; Refractive error.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Financial support: The authors were supported by the following foundations: Oogfonds (2016-23 to C.C.W.K.), Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO; grant 91815655 to C.C.W.K. and grant 91617076 to V.J.M.V.) and European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant 648268 to C.C.W.K.). EMBO Short-Term Fellowship (grant 8529 to J.S.). The funding organizations had no role in the design or conduct of this research. They provided unrestricted grants. The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. Conflict of interest: The authors have no relevant financial interests to disclose.

References

    1. Meng W, Butterworth J, Malecaze F, Calvas P. Axial length of myopia: a review of current research. Ophthalmologica. 2011;225(3):127–34. https://doi.org/10.1159/000317072 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Williams KM, Verhoeven VJM, Cumberland P, et al. Prevalence of refractive error in Europe: the European Eye Epidemiology (E3) Consortium. Eur J Epidemiol. 2015;30(4):305–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-015-0010-0 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Chen M, Wu A, Zhang L, et al. The increasing prevalence of myopia and high myopia among high school students in Fenghua City, eastern China: a 15-year population-based survey. BMC Ophthalmol. 2018;18(1):159. - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Naidoo KS, Fricke TR, Frick KD, et al. Potential lost Productivity resulting from the global burden of myopia: systematic review, Meta-analysis, and modeling. Ophthalmology. 2019;126(3):338–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.10.029 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Haarman AEG, Enthoven CA, Tideman JWL, Tedja MS, Verhoeven VJM, Klaver CCW. The complications of myopia: a review and Meta-analysis. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2020;61(4):49. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources