April 2009
Volume 50, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2009
Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD)- The Vision Loss Group: Methodology and Results of Systematic Review
R. R. Bourne; J. L. Leasher; J. E. Keefe; S. Gichuhi; K. Naidoo; D. Pascolini; T. Wong; R. Dandona; H. R. Taylor; P. C. Sieving
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • R. R. Bourne
    Department of Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital & Hinchingbrooke, Huntingdon, United Kingdom
  • J. L. Leasher
    North American Regional Coordinator of the UNESCO Chair in Visual Health and Development, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida
  • J. E. Keefe
    Centre for Eye Research Australia,
    University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  • S. Gichuhi
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya
  • K. Naidoo
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
  • D. Pascolini
    World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland
  • T. Wong
    Centre for Eye Research Australia,
    University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  • R. Dandona
    George Institute for International Health, Hyderabad, India
  • H. R. Taylor
    Centre for Eye Research Australia,,
    University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  • P. C. Sieving
    National Institutes of Health Library, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  R.R. Bourne, None; J.L. Leasher, None; J.E. Keefe, None; S. Gichuhi, None; K. Naidoo, None; D. Pascolini, None; T. Wong, None; R. Dandona, None; H.R. Taylor, None; P.C. Sieving, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2009, Vol.50, 2493. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      User Alerts
      You are adding an alert for:
      Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD)- The Vision Loss Group: Methodology and Results of Systematic Review
      You will receive an email whenever this article is corrected, updated, or cited in the literature. You can manage this and all other alerts in My Account
      The alert will be sent to:
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation
      Citation

      R. R. Bourne, J. L. Leasher, J. E. Keefe, S. Gichuhi, K. Naidoo, D. Pascolini, T. Wong, R. Dandona, H. R. Taylor, P. C. Sieving; Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD)- The Vision Loss Group: Methodology and Results of Systematic Review. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2009;50(13):2493.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
    • Get Permissions
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : The new GBD Study is the first major effort since the original 1990 study was completed to carry out a complete systematic assessment of population data on all diseases and injuries to produce estimates of their burden for 1990 and 2005. The Vision Loss group is responsible for estimating the burden of visual impairment (VI).

Methods: : Case definitions for 6 levels of presenting vision loss (sequelae) were agreed in the better seeing eye: i. Distance mild VI (visual acuity, VA of <6/12 but ≥6/18), ii. Distance moderate VI (VA of <6/18 but ≥6/60), iii. Distance severe VI (VA of <6/60 but ≥3/60), iv. Distance vision blindness (VA <3/60 &/or <10% visual field around central fixation), v. Near VI (near VA <0.5 but ≥0.05 with a distance VA≥6/12), vi. Near vision blindness (near VA <0.05 with distance VA≥6/12). We conducted a search of Medline (PubMed), Embase and the WHO Library using search terms that included eye diseases, visual sequelae and epidemiological terms for articles published between 1980 and 2008. All non population-based studies were excluded. Full text articles were reviewed for eligibility and a quality assessment tool applied. Data abstracted yields age and sex-specific prevalence and incidence of visual sequelae, with cause-specific breakdown where possible.

Results: : The search strategy yielded 10,871 articles. The breakdown by global region was as follows: Europe (33%), North America (25%), Asia (21%), Africa (12%), Australasia and Oceania (5%), Latin America (3%), Caribbean (1%). Further results will be available in Spring 2009.

Conclusions: : We aim to improve the accuracy of the global visual burden estimate by incorporating a wealth of recent population-based studies, incorporating new methods of estimating disease burden, reducing the threshold of VI to 6/12, reporting on presenting VA rather than best-corrected visual acuity, and involving estimates of near VI for the first time.

Keywords: clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: prevalence/incidence • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: biostatistics/epidemiology methodology 
© 2009, The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc., all rights reserved. Permission to republish any abstract or part of an abstract in any form must be obtained in writing from the ARVO Office prior to publication.
Copyright © 2025 Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy.Accept