This cross-sectional (retrospective) study was conducted to assess the occurrence of refractive errors among primary school children in Babylon, Iraq. The findings revealed a prevalence of 19.3% for refractive errors. Among these, myopia emerged as the most prevalent condition, accounting for 47.0% of all identified refractive errors.
Our study encompassed a sample size of 1014 students, which is notably larger compared to Mohammed's study involving 680 students [11], and RafeaA's study with 592 students [12]. Moreover, our study revealed a distribution of 41.7% male and 58.3% female participants. However, in Rafea A F's study [13], the male-female distribution was 51.9% and 48.1% respectively, and in Noor H A's study [14], it was 44.8% male and 55.2% female. These discrepancies in percentage distributions in our study could be attributed to the selection of a more extensive sample size. Indeed, the actual prevalence of myopia among schoolchildren in our study was determined to be 19.3%. It's worth noting that our findings differed from those reported in the study conducted by MUKAZHANOVA, where a higher prevalence of refractive error, specifically 31.6%, was observed [15]. In this study conducted in Babylon, Iraq, the occurrence of refractive error was determined to be 18% among students from two primary schools. This prevalence rate is lower than the 26.73% reported in a study involving college students in Iraq [15]. However, the prevalence rates found in other studies, such as the one in Kathmandu, Nepal [14] (8.1%), Chile [5] (8.8%), and by Zhao J [16] (11.3%), were more in line with the findings of our study. Furthermore, the prevalence of myopia, at 9.1%, closely resembled that reported among the Malay population in East Malaysia [17] (6.0%), as well as the study by Murthy GV [18] (8.4%). However, the myopia prevalence in our study was higher than the study conducted in Kathmandu, Nepal [14] (4.3%). Similarly, the prevalence of hypermetropia, at 7.2%, is closely aligned with findings from the study by Murthy GV [18] (6.2%) and Chile [5] (7.2%). Discrepancies were noted in other studies, such as Nepal [14] (1.4%) and Wadaani FA [19] (1.7%).
The prevalence of astigmatism, at 3.0%, closely resembled the findings from the study in Nepal [14] (2.4%), while diverging significantly from the study by Rose KA [20] (15%). These may include the definition of study populations, definition of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism, methods of measurement, and the types of environments- all factors considered. However, as only students with visual acuity of ≤ 0.30 (6/12) were collected, many students with a low degree of refractive error may have gone undetected. Hyperopic children may compensate by accommodation, while some myopic children may squint, masking the actual level of poor visual acuity [21,22].
The factors associated with refractive errors in primary school children in Babylon were age, hours of reading per day, computer use, and siblings' history of wearing glasses. Gender and parental history of eyeglass-wearing were not significantly associated with refractive errors.
Our study was cross-sectional, so we could not establish a causal relationship between the associations we observed in the risk factor analyses. Moreover, our measurements were taken once at the beginning of the school year, in the fall. It may have a biased effect in reducing the prevalence of myopia because children may spend more time outdoors in the warm season, especially during the summer holidays, with greater exposure to natural daylight [23,24].