The first important finding was that routine datasets underestimated the true prevalence of visual impairment. In 2016, only 7% of the visually impaired population was registered.The underestimation of blindness by CVI statistics in England and Wales has received considerable attention. [7, 11,12,13]. A recent publication by Olvera-Barrios et al.Britain’s largest eye care center suggests underregistration of diabetic retinopathy patients could reach 84% [14]. A closer look at the paper and its data suggests that this number is likely an overestimate. Certification is not typically offered as a treatment setting, as researchers may not fully consider the challenges of visual fluctuations in patients with treatable eye diseases. diabetes etc. Burkiza et al. Commenting on this point in a paper that looked specifically at accreditation for diabetics in East London, they stated that ‘a single measure of acuity should never be used to assess accreditation’. [15].
Figure 1a,b shows why CVI numbers (TTBWA) underestimate blindness.
be CVI rates are not the same as blindness rates. b CVI – The tip of the amblyopia iceberg.
Teo et al. Recently reported “Temporal changes in the epidemiology of childhood severe visual impairment and blindness in the UK” [16]. To do this, we compared the results of two national population-based epidemiological studies of childhood severe visual impairment and blindness incidents in the UK. [17, 18]. The studies used identical methods, the first conducted in his year 2000 and the second in 2015. The main results were that overall annual and cumulative morbidity rates remained largely stable and mortality rates decreased for children diagnosed in infancy. Taken together, this information may lead us to speculate that the prevalence of childhood blindness may be increasing. This is the result of an analysis of registration and authentication data. [19, 20].
If incidence rates remain the same but mortality rates decrease, prevalence is likely to increase unless recovery improves (Figure 2). Prevalence may be increasing because the incidence of blindness in children is constant, mortality is decreasing, and there is little change in the recovery of certain conditions that affect children. [21].
Epidemiologist’s bathtub.
