Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/9044
Title: Birth order and myopia
Authors: Guggenheim, JA
McMahon, G
Northstone, K
Mandel, Y
Kaiserman, I
Stone, RA
Lin, X
Saw, SM
Forward, H
Mackey, DA
Yazar, S
Young, TL
Williams, C
Keywords: Avon longitudinal study of parents and children
Birth order
Myopia
Raine eye health study
Refractive error
Singapore cohort study of risk factors for Myopia
Issue Date: 2013
Publisher: Informa Healthcare
Source: Ophthalmic epidemiology, 2013, v. 20, no. 6, p. 375-384 How to cite?
Journal: Ophthalmic Epidemiology 
Abstract: Purpose: An association between birth order and reduced unaided vision (a surrogate for myopia) has been observed previously. We examined the association between birth order and myopia directly in four subject groups. Methods: Subject groups were participants in (1) the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC; UK; age 15 years; N=4401), (2) the Singapore Cohort Study of Risk Factors for Myopia (SCORM; Singapore; age 13 years; N=1959), (3) the Raine Eye Health Study (REHS; Australia; age 20 years; N=1344), and (4) Israeli Defense Force Pre-recruitment Candidates (IDFC; Israel; age 16-22 years; N=888,277). The main outcome was odds ratios (OR) for myopia in first-born versus non-first-born individuals after adjusting for potential risk factors. Results: The prevalence of myopia was numerically higher in first-born versus non-first-born individuals in all study groups, but the strength of evidence varied widely. Adjusted ORs (95% confidence intervals, CIs) were: ALSPAC, 1.31 (1.05-1.64); SCORM, 1.25 (0.89-1.77); REHS, 1.18 (0.90-1.55); and IDFC, 1.04 (1.03-1.06). In the large IDFC sample, the effect size was greater (a) for the first-born versus fourth- or higher-born comparison than for the first-born versus second/third-born comparison (p<0.001) and (b) with increasing myopia severity (p<0.001). Conclusions: Across all studies, the increased risk of myopia in first-born individuals was low (OR<1.3). Indeed, only the studies with >4000 participants provided strong statistical support for the association. The available evidence suggested the relationship was independent of established risk factors such as time outdoors/reading, and thus may arise through a different causal mechanism.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/9044
ISSN: 0928-6586
DOI: 10.3109/09286586.2013.848457
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article

Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

9
Last Week
0
Last month
2
Citations as of Aug 20, 2017

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

9
Last Week
0
Last month
3
Citations as of Aug 20, 2017

Page view(s)

42
Last Week
4
Last month
Checked on Aug 20, 2017

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.