Increased Prevalence of Myopia in the United States Between 1971-1972 and 1999-2004 | Ophthalmology | JAMA Ophthalmology | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.239.177.24. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Saw  SMKatz  JSchein  ODShew  SJChan  TK Epidemiology of myopia.  Epidemiol Rev 1996;18 (2) 175- 187PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Gwiazda  JThorn  F Development of refraction and strabismus.  Curr Opin Ophthalmol 1999;10 (5) 293- 299PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Weale  RA Epidemiology of refractive errors and presbyopia.  Surv Ophthalmol 2003;48 (5) 515- 543PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Sperduto  RDSeigel  DRoberts  JRowland  M Prevalence of myopia in the United States.  Arch Ophthalmol 1983;101 (3) 405- 407PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Bar Dayan  YLevin  AMorad  Y  et al.  The changing prevalence of myopia in young adults: a 13-year series of population-based prevalence surveys.  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005;46 (8) 2760- 2765PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Rose  KSmith  WMorgan  IMitchell  P The increasing prevalence of myopia: implications for Australia.  Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 2001;29 (3) 116- 120PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Vitale  SEllwein  LCotch  MFFerris  FL  IIISperduto  R Prevalence of refractive error in the United States, 1999-2004.  Arch Ophthalmol 2008;126 (8) 1111- 1119PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
National Center for Health Statistics, Plan and Operation of the HANES I Augmentation Survey of Adults 25-74 Years, United States, 1974-1975.  Hyattsville, MD National Center for Health Statistics1978;DHEW publication PHS 78-1314
9.
National Center for Health Statistics, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, 1999-2004. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/nhanes/datalink.htm. Accessed February 16, 2005
10.
National Center for Health Statistics, Plan and Operation of the Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, United States, 1971-1973.  Hyattsville, MD National Center for Health Statistics1973;DHEW publication PHS 79-1310
11.
Engel  AMurphy  RSMaurer  KCollins  E Plan and operation of the HANES I augmentation survey of adults 25-74 years, United States, 1974-1975.  Vital Health Stat 1 1978; (14) 1- 110PubMedGoogle Scholar
12.
Miller  HW Plan and operation of the health and nutrition examination survey, United States: 1971-1973.  Vital Health Stat 1 1973; (10a) 1- 46PubMedGoogle Scholar
13.
Miech  RAKumanyika  SKStettler  NLink  BGPhelan  JCChang  VW Trends in the association of poverty with overweight among US adolescents, 1971-2004.  JAMA 2006;295 (20) 2385- 2393PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Waksberg  JLevine  DMarker  D Assessment of major federal data sets for analyses of Hispanic and Asian or Pacific Islander subgroups and Native Americans, appendix B: inventory of selected existing federal data bases. http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/minority-db00/task2/APP-B.HTM#nhanes. Accessed July 5, 2007
15.
Sloan  LL Measurement of visual acuity: a critical review.  Arch Ophthalmol 1951;45 (6) 704- 725Google ScholarCrossref
16.
Malec  DDavis  WWCao  X Model-based small area estimates of overweight prevalence using sample selection adjustment.  Stat Med 1999;18 (23) 3189- 3200PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
National Center for Health Statistics, NHANES analytic guidelines, June 2004 version. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes_general_guidelines_june_04.pdf. Accessed July 27, 2007
18.
Graubard  BIFears  TR Standard errors for attributable risk for simple and complex sample designs.  Biometrics 2005;61 (3) 847- 855PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
National Center for Health Statistics, Analytic and reporting guidelines: the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, NHANES III (1988-94), October 1996. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes3/nh3gui.pdf. Accessed July 27, 2007
20.
National Center for Health Statistics, Analytic and reporting guidelines: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), September 2006. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/nhanes_03_04/nhanes_analytic_guidelines_dec_2005.pdf. Accessed July 27, 2007
21.
National Center for Health Statistics, NHANES 1999-2000 addendum to the NHANES III analytic guidelines. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhanes/guidelines1.pdf. Accessed July 27, 2007
22.
Hyman  L Myopic and hyperopic refractive error in adults: an overview.  Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2007;14 (4) 192- 197PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Morgan  IRose  K How genetic is school myopia?  Prog Retin Eye Res 2005;24 (1) 1- 38PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Tarczy-Hornoch  KYing-Lai  MVarma  RLos Angeles Latino Eye Study Group, Myopic refractive error in adult Latinos: the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study.  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47 (5) 1845- 1852PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Wensor  M McCarty  CATaylor  HR Prevalence and risk factors of myopia in Victoria, Australia.  Arch Ophthalmol 1999;117 (5) 658- 663PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Kempen  JHMitchell  PLee  KE  et al. Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group, The prevalence of refractive errors among adults in the United States, Western Europe, and Australia.  Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122 (4) 495- 505PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
National Center for Health Statistics, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1971-75: Near and Distant Vision, Ages 25-74.  Hyattsville, MDNational Center for Health Statistics. Public use data tape documentation, tape 4163
28.
Tay  MTAu Eong  KGNg  CYLim  MK Myopia and educational attainment in 421 116 young Singaporean males.  Ann Acad Med Singapore 1992;21 (6) 785- 791PubMedGoogle Scholar
29.
Matsumura  HHirai  H Prevalence of myopia and refractive changes in students from 3 to 17 years of age.  Surv Ophthalmol 1999;44 ((suppl 1)) S109- S115PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Wu  MMEdwards  MH The effect of having myopic parents: an analysis of myopia in three generations.  Optom Vis Sci 1999;76 (6) 387- 392PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Vitale  SCotch  MFSperduto  RDEllwein  L Costs of refractive correction of distance vision impairment in the United States, 1999-2002.  Ophthalmology 2006;113 (12) 2163- 2170PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Rein  DBZhang  PWirth  KE  et al.  The economic burden of major adult visual disorders in the United States.  Arch Ophthalmol 2006;124 (12) 1754- 1760PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Epidemiology
December 14, 2009

Increased Prevalence of Myopia in the United States Between 1971-1972 and 1999-2004

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Applications, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

 

LESLIEHYMANPhD

Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(12):1632-1639. doi:10.1001/archophthalmol.2009.303
Abstract

Objective  To compare US population prevalence estimates for myopia in 1971-1972 and 1999-2004.

Methods  The 1971-1972 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey provided the earliest nationally representative estimates for US myopia prevalence; myopia was diagnosed by an algorithm using either lensometry, pinhole visual acuity, and presenting visual acuity (for presenting visual acuity ≥20/40) or retinoscopy (for presenting visual acuity ≤20/50). Using a similar method for diagnosing myopia, we examined data from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to determine whether myopia prevalence had changed during the 30 years between the 2 surveys.

Results  Using the 1971-1972 method, the estimated prevalence of myopia in persons aged 12 to 54 years was significantly higher in 1999-2004 than in 1971-1972 (41.6% vs 25.0%, respectively; P < .001). Prevalence estimates were higher in 1999-2004 than in 1971-1972 for black individuals (33.5% vs 13.0%, respectively; P < .001) and white individuals (43.0% vs 26.3%, respectively; P < .001) and for all levels of myopia severity (>−2.0 diopters [D]: 17.5% vs 13.4%, respectively [P < .001]; ≤−2.0 to >−7.9 D: 22.4% vs 11.4%, respectively [P < .001]; ≤−7.9 D: 1.6% vs 0.2%, respectively [P < .001]).

Conclusions  When using similar methods for each period, the prevalence of myopia in the United States appears to be substantially higher in 1999-2004 than 30 years earlier. Identifying modifiable risk factors for myopia could lead to the development of cost-effective interventional strategies.

×