Acta ophthalmologica · 2025
Self-perceived and measured visual function, the impact of eye-disease, wellbeing, social determinants, and personality traits in Swedish 70-year-olds-results from the Gothenburg H70 Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Havstam Johansson Lena, Zetterberg Madeleine, Falk Erhag Hanna
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To explore the potential correlation between subjective and measured visual function, as well as to analyse the influence of eye disease, socioeconomic factors and emotional dimensions.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews, physical examinations and functional tests (n = 1203). Demographics covered sex, marital status, education, household economy, smoking and alcohol. Participants (born in 1944) rated their visual function (n = 533); those misjudging (n = 48) were studied. Group A (n = 18) had low presenting visual acuity (PVA) but reported good vision; Group B (n = 30) had normal PVA but reported low vision. Control group (n = 485) matched subjective and measured visual function. Ophthalmic examination tested visual acuity (VA), visual field and contrast sensitivity (CS). Psychometric tests: NEO-FFI, sense of coherence (SOC) and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).
STATISTICAL TESTS: chi-square, t-tests, Mann-Whitney U test and logistic regression.
RESULTS: Of the population, 91% made correct assumptions about their vision. The 9% who made incorrect assumptions about their vision ability (combining groups A + B) were more likely to live alone (p = 0.02) and had lower household incomes compared to the control group (p = 0.04). Additionally, the exhibited significantly lower PVA and BCVA, a higher prevalence of visual field defects (p = 0.02) and lower CS, mean 1.63 (p = 0.005). Group A (3.4%) were women (p = 0.002) with the personality of extraversion, mean 40.0 (p = 0.01). Group B (5.6%) had more self-reported eye diseases (p = 0.01), lower CS (p = 0.01), lower educational level (p = 0.03) and border significantly lower SOC (p = 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS: The perception of visual function is shaped by awareness of an eye disease but is additionally influenced by sex, socioeconomic factors and emotional parameters.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews, physical examinations and functional tests (n = 1203). Demographics covered sex, marital status, education, household economy, smoking and alcohol. Participants (born in 1944) rated their visual function (n = 533); those misjudging (n = 48) were studied. Group A (n = 18) had low presenting visual acuity (PVA) but reported good vision; Group B (n = 30) had normal PVA but reported low vision. Control group (n = 485) matched subjective and measured visual function. Ophthalmic examination tested visual acuity (VA), visual field and contrast sensitivity (CS). Psychometric tests: NEO-FFI, sense of coherence (SOC) and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).
STATISTICAL TESTS: chi-square, t-tests, Mann-Whitney U test and logistic regression.
RESULTS: Of the population, 91% made correct assumptions about their vision. The 9% who made incorrect assumptions about their vision ability (combining groups A + B) were more likely to live alone (p = 0.02) and had lower household incomes compared to the control group (p = 0.04). Additionally, the exhibited significantly lower PVA and BCVA, a higher prevalence of visual field defects (p = 0.02) and lower CS, mean 1.63 (p = 0.005). Group A (3.4%) were women (p = 0.002) with the personality of extraversion, mean 40.0 (p = 0.01). Group B (5.6%) had more self-reported eye diseases (p = 0.01), lower CS (p = 0.01), lower educational level (p = 0.03) and border significantly lower SOC (p = 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS: The perception of visual function is shaped by awareness of an eye disease but is additionally influenced by sex, socioeconomic factors and emotional parameters.