Refractive error, eye care needs and attitude towards spectacle wearing among older Zanzibari craftswomen and implications for developing women-targeted services: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aged Zanzibari women are in a disadvantaged position, having high demand for near-vision spectacles. Currently, there is no information on the eye health status of craftswomen, which makes planning a women-targeted project to deliver eye health services to older craftswomen in Zanzibar difficult. We assessed the prevalence of vision impairment, refractive error, presbyopia, effective spectacle coverage (distance and near) and attitude towards spectacle wearing among older Zanzibari craftswomen. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This was a cross-sectional study. Unaided and presenting distance and near vision of craftswomen 35 years and older were assessed at the women's co-operatives. We determined the number of those with distance vision poorer than 6/12 and their causes (distance-vision impairment), the number of those with near vision poorer than N8 at 40 cm (presbyopia) and the number of those whose distance and/or near-vision needs were met adequately with their habitual spectacles (effective distance and near spectacle coverages). A piloted and validated questionnaire (15 statements) was used to determine their attitude towards spectacle wearing. RESULTS: In all, 263 craftswomen participated in the survey (mean age 52.1 years±9.4 years). The prevalence of distance vision impairment among the craftswomen was 29.7% (95% CI 24.2% to 35.6%), the primary cause being uncorrected refractive error (n=51, 65.4%), and none were corrected. The prevalence of presbyopia was 86.6% (95% CI 81.5% to 90.7%, n=231) and the effective near spectacle coverage was 0.99%. The craftswomen showed a positive attitude towards spectacle wearing (strongly agree or agree) based on 12 out of 15 statements. CONCLUSION: The high burden of vision impairment, uncorrected distance refractive error and presbyopia, and a positive attitude towards spectacle wearing among older craftswomen in Zanzibar indicated the need for women-targeted eye health programmes in low-resource settings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".