The Evidence on Teaching

Time spent outdoors as an intervention for myopia prevention and control in children - an overview of systematic reviews

Dhakal R, Shah R, Huntjens B, Verkicharla PK, Lawrenson JG · 2022

grade Creviewindependentreplicated
Sample
7 systematic reviews covering 47 primary studies and 63,920 participants
Population
Children; searches to 1 November 2020
Design
An umbrella review that formally appraises the quality of the existing syntheses using AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS rather than re-pooling effects. This is the adversarial check on the outdoor-time literature and the reason it belongs here.
Key findings
Pooled estimates across reviews consistently show time outdoors reduces the prevalence and incidence of myopia. But for slowing progression in eyes that are already myopic, the reported annual reductions in spherical equivalent and axial length were small (0.13-0.17 D) and judged clinically insignificant. The damning methodological finding: ALL seven systematic reviews had one or more critical AMSTAR-2 flaws, and ROBIS identified low risk of bias in only two of the seven. The authors state explicitly that poor methodological quality reduces confidence in the estimates of effect.
Genetic confound
Inherits the confounding of the reviews it appraises, most of which pool observational studies. The overview does not attempt a genetically informative analysis.

Effects

OutcomeMetricValueMeasureTimingVsHorizonClass
Myopia incidence and prevalencedirection of pooled estimates across 7 reviewsconsistently protectivestandardizedvariesnoneunclearhealth
Myopia progression in already-myopic eyesannual change in SER / axial length0.13-0.17 D per year - judged clinically insignificantstandardizedannualnoneend-of-treatmenthealth
Methodological quality of the evidence baseAMSTAR-2 / ROBIS7/7 reviews had >=1 critical AMSTAR-2 flaw; only 2/7 low risk of bias on ROBISstandardizedn/anonenot-applicablehealth

Cited by

Time spent outdoors as an intervention for myopia prevention and control in children - an overview of systematic reviews · The Evidence on Teaching