Vision Screening of Students In Liberia

Hertz, Judith; Gombosh, George; Av-Shalom, A.

doi:10.3928/0191-3913-19640701-07

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The remaining 73 population-based studies provided information on a total of 384 658 subjects (194 944 males and 189 664 females; strabismus cases: 4980 males and 4890 females). Partially overlapping with these reports, 42 studies provided gender information about esotropia (cases: 1979 males and 1911 females), and 43 studies provided gender information on exotropia (cases: 1477 males and 1447 females) [ 10 , 14 - 16 , 22 , 32 - 35 , 37 , 41 , 43 , 44 , 46 - 54 , 57 , 61 , 62 , 64 , 65 , 67 , 69 - 71 , 74 , 77 - 79 , 82 , 84 , 85 , 90 - 93 ]. The global distribution of the 73 population-based studies reporting on horizontal strabismus is shown, along with their cohort sizes, in Figure 2 , panel A.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender differences in horizontal strabismus: Systematic review and meta-analysis shows no difference in prevalence, but gender bias towards females in the clinic

Laughton,

Hagen,

Yang

et al. 2023

J Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Strabismus is a misalignment of the visual axis that affects 2-3% of the population and can lead to loss of binocular vision. It is currently controversial whether there is a gender difference in the most common form of visual misalignment: horizontal strabismus. Some studies claimed that more females than males have an outward deviation (exotropia), while others concluded that there is no significant gender difference. No previous work has systematically explored gender differences in horizontal strabismus or has compared the results of population-based studies with those of clinic-based studies. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the prevalence of horizontal strabismus. We included 73 population-based studies and compared their disclosed gender population with that in 141 comparable clinical-based studies. We analysed the data according to gender, strabismus type (esotropia, exotropia), and geographic region/ethnicity. Results Summary statistics showed a nearly identical prevalence of horizontal strabismus (2.558% for males, 2.582% for females), esotropia (1.386% males vs. 1.377% females), and of exotropia (1.035% males vs. 1.043% females). Meta-analysis results showed that these differences between males and females were not statistically significant (odds ratio (OR) = 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.97-1.10), but that females were significantly more frequent (by 7.50%) in clinic-based studies than males, with 5.00% more females for esotropia, and 12.20% more females for exotropia when adjusted for the population’s sex ratio. The extent of the female gender bias differed between geographic regions/societies, with Asians having the lowest bias towards females and Latin American countries having the strongest bias. Conclusions Males and females have the same prevalence of horizontal strabismus, including exotropia. Females with strabismus seek health care or are brought to clinics significantly more often than males. This is an example of gender bias in health care in favour of females rather than males, apparently because parents – erroneously fearing only cosmetic consequences – are more concerned about strabismus in their daughters than their sons. Societal attitudes towards females, as well as economic factors (insurance status), appear to be relevant factors that determine the magnitude of the gender bias in horizontal strabismus.

show abstract