The aim of the study was a systematic review of refractive errors across the world according to the WHO regions. To extract articles on the prevalence of refractive errors for this meta-analysis, international databases were searched from 1990 to 2016. The results of the retrieved studies were merged using a random effect model and reported as estimated pool prevalence (EPP) with 95% confidence interval (CI). In children, the EPP of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism was 11.7% (95% CI: 10.5-13.0), 4.6% (95% CI: 3.9-5.2), and 14.9% (95% CI: 12.7-17.1), respectively. The EPP of myopia ranged from 4.9% (95% CI: 1.6-8.1) in South-East Asia to 18.2% (95% CI: 10.9-25.5) in the Western Pacific region, the EPP of hyperopia ranged from 2.2% (95% CI: 1.2-3.3) in South-East Asia to 14.3% (95% CI: 13.4-15.2) in the Americas, and the EPP of astigmatism ranged from 9.8% in South-East Asia to 27.2% in the Americas. In adults, the EPP of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism was 26.5% (95% CI: 23.4-29.6), 30.9% (95% CI: 26.2-35.6), and 40.4% (95% CI: 34.3-46.6), respectively. The EPP of myopia ranged from 16.2% (95% CI: 15.6-16.8) in the Americas to 32.9% (95% CI: 25.1-40.7) in South-East Asia, the EPP of hyperopia ranged from 23.1% (95% CI: 6.1%-40.2%) in Europe to 38.6% (95% CI: 22.4-54.8) in Africa and 37.2% (95% CI: 25.3-49) in the Americas, and the EPP of astigmatism ranged from 11.4% (95% CI: 2.1-20.7) in Africa to 45.6% (95% CI: 44.1-47.1) in the Americas and 44.8% (95% CI: 36.6-53.1) in South-East Asia. The results of meta-regression showed that the prevalence of myopia increased from 1993 (10.4%) to 2016 (34.2%) (P = 0.097). This report showed that astigmatism was the most common refractive errors in children and adults followed by hyperopia and myopia. The highest prevalence of myopia and astigmatism was seen in South-East Asian adults. The highest prevalence of hyperopia in children and adults was seen in the Americas.

Many studies on children have shown that lack of cycloplegia is associated with slight overestimation of myopia and marked errors in estimates of the prevalence of emmetropia and hyperopia. Non‐cycloplegic refraction is particularly problematic for studies of associations with risk factors. The consensus around the importance of cycloplegia in children left undefined at what age, if any, cycloplegia became unnecessary. It was often implicitly assumed that cycloplegia is not necessary beyond childhood or early adulthood, and thus, the protocol for the classical studies of refraction in older adults did not include cycloplegia. Now that population studies of refractive error are beginning to fill the gap between schoolchildren and older adults, whether cycloplegia is required for measuring refractive error in this age range, needs to be defined. Data from the Tehran Eye Study show that, without cycloplegia, there are errors in the estimation of myopia, emmetropia and hyperopia in the age range 20–50, just as in children. Similar results have been reported in an analysis of data from the Beaver Dam Offspring Eye Study. If the only important outcome measure of a particular study is the prevalence of myopia, then cycloplegia may not be crucial in some cases. But, without cycloplegia, measurements of other refractive categories as well as spherical equivalent are unreliable. In summary, the current evidence suggests that cycloplegic refraction should be considered as the gold standard for epidemiological studies of refraction, not only in children, but in adults up to the age of 50.

Aim: To determine the prevalence of refractive errors among schoolchildren in urban and rural areas of Dezful County, Iran. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, using random cluster sampling, 5721 Dezful schoolchildren were selected from 39 clusters. The participants in the study totalled 5544; 3673 elementary and middle school students and 1871 high school students. For the former group, cycloplegic refraction and for the latter, non-cycloplegic refraction was tested. In all participants, uncorrected visual acuity and best corrected visual acuity were determined, and those with a visual acuity of 20/40 or worse, underwent a complete ophthalmic examination to determine the cause of visual impairment. A spherical equivalent of −0.5 diopter (D) or worse was defined as myopia, +2.0 D or more was defined as hyperopia, and a cylinder refraction greater than 0.75 D was considered astigmatism. Results: The uncorrected visual acuity was 20/40 or worse in the better eye of 224 schoolchildren (3.8% of participants). This figure (percentage) was 14 (0.03%) based on their best corrected visual acuity and 96 (1.7%) with their presenting vision. According to results of cycloplegic refraction, 3.4% (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.5 to 4.4) of the primary and middle school students were myopic and 16.6% (95% CI, 13.6 to 19.7) were hyperopic. For high school students, these rates were 2.1% (95% CI, 0.7 to 3.5) and 33.0% (95% CI, 24.9 to 41.1), respectively, with non-cycloplegic refraction. In the multivariate logistic regression for primary and middle school students, myopia was correlated with age (p = 0.030), and hyperopia was correlated with age (p<0.001) and area of residence (p = 0.007). In high school students, hyperopia again showed a correlation with their area of residence (p = 0.029). Conclusion: The present study reveals the considerable prevalence rates of refractive errors among schoolchildren in Dezful County and the high rate of an unmet need for their correction. Although myopia is not very prevalent, the high rate of hyperopia in the studied population emphasises its need for attention.