Vision Screening Prevalence and Disparities Among U.S. School-Aged Children Prior to and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Diane M Gibson
{"title":"Vision Screening Prevalence and Disparities Among U.S. School-Aged Children Prior to and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.","authors":"Diane M Gibson","doi":"10.1080/09286586.2025.2512324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine trends and disparities in vision screening among U.S. school-aged children prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used nationally representative data on children aged 6-17 years residing in U.S. households from the 2016, 2017, and 2021-2023 survey years of the National Survey of Children's Health.  A child was defined as having had their vision screened if their caregiver reported that in the past 2 years the child had their vision tested (2016 and 2017) or that they visited an eye doctor or received vision screening from a provider other than an eye doctor (2021-2023).  Descriptive statistics and linear regression models were used to examine trends in the prevalence of vision screening and to assess whether the association between vision screening and sociodemographic and contextual variables changed over time.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The weighted prevalence of vision screening in the past 2 years for U.S. school-aged children was 84.6% in 2016, 84.9% in 2017, 77.8% in 2021, 79.7% in 2022 and 79.6% in 2023. In regression models, lower household income, lower parental education, lack of health insurance, a primary household language other than English, not having a usual source of health care, and living in a state without vision screening requirements were associated with a significantly lower likelihood of vision screening. Screening disparities increased over time for children whose primary household language was not English or who were uninsured.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Public health interventions should be considered to reduce widening disparities in vision screening among U.S. school-age children.</p>","PeriodicalId":19607,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09286586.2025.2512324","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To examine trends and disparities in vision screening among U.S. school-aged children prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: This study used nationally representative data on children aged 6-17 years residing in U.S. households from the 2016, 2017, and 2021-2023 survey years of the National Survey of Children's Health.  A child was defined as having had their vision screened if their caregiver reported that in the past 2 years the child had their vision tested (2016 and 2017) or that they visited an eye doctor or received vision screening from a provider other than an eye doctor (2021-2023).  Descriptive statistics and linear regression models were used to examine trends in the prevalence of vision screening and to assess whether the association between vision screening and sociodemographic and contextual variables changed over time.

Results: The weighted prevalence of vision screening in the past 2 years for U.S. school-aged children was 84.6% in 2016, 84.9% in 2017, 77.8% in 2021, 79.7% in 2022 and 79.6% in 2023. In regression models, lower household income, lower parental education, lack of health insurance, a primary household language other than English, not having a usual source of health care, and living in a state without vision screening requirements were associated with a significantly lower likelihood of vision screening. Screening disparities increased over time for children whose primary household language was not English or who were uninsured.

Conclusion: Public health interventions should be considered to reduce widening disparities in vision screening among U.S. school-age children.

在COVID-19大流行之前和期间,美国学龄儿童的视力筛查患病率和差异
目的:研究2019冠状病毒病大流行之前和期间美国学龄儿童视力筛查的趋势和差异。方法:本研究使用了2016年、2017年和2021-2023年全国儿童健康调查年度居住在美国家庭中的6-17岁儿童的全国代表性数据。如果儿童的护理人员报告在过去两年内(2016年和2017年)对儿童进行了视力检查,或者他们看过眼科医生或接受了眼科医生以外的提供者的视力筛查(2021-2023年),则该儿童被定义为接受过视力筛查。使用描述性统计和线性回归模型来检查视力筛查的流行趋势,并评估视力筛查与社会人口统计学和环境变量之间的关联是否随时间而变化。结果:美国学龄儿童过去2年视力筛查加权患病率2016年为84.6%,2017年为84.9%,2021年为77.8%,2022年为79.7%,2023年为79.6%。在回归模型中,家庭收入较低、父母受教育程度较低、缺乏健康保险、家庭主要语言不是英语、没有通常的医疗保健来源以及生活在没有视力筛查要求的州,与视力筛查的可能性显著降低相关。对于主要家庭语言不是英语或没有保险的儿童,筛查差异随着时间的推移而增加。结论:应考虑公共卫生干预措施,以减少美国学龄儿童视力筛查中日益扩大的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ophthalmic epidemiology
Ophthalmic epidemiology 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ophthalmic Epidemiology is dedicated to the publication of original research into eye and vision health in the fields of epidemiology, public health and the prevention of blindness. Ophthalmic Epidemiology publishes editorials, original research reports, systematic reviews and meta-analysis articles, brief communications and letters to the editor on all subjects related to ophthalmic epidemiology. A broad range of topics is suitable, such as: evaluating the risk of ocular diseases, general and specific study designs, screening program implementation and evaluation, eye health care access, delivery and outcomes, therapeutic efficacy or effectiveness, disease prognosis and quality of life, cost-benefit analysis, biostatistical theory and risk factor analysis. We are looking to expand our engagement with reports of international interest, including those regarding problems affecting developing countries, although reports from all over the world potentially are suitable. Clinical case reports, small case series (not enough for a cohort analysis) articles and animal research reports are not appropriate for this journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信