12 research outputs found
Little evidence for an epidemic of myopia in Australian primary school children over the last 30 years
BACKGROUND: Recently reported prevalences of myopia in primary school children vary greatly in different regions of the world. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of refractive errors in an unselected urban population of young primary school children in eastern Sydney, Australia, between 1998 and 2004, for comparison with our previously published data gathered using the same protocols and other Australian studies over the last 30 years. METHODS: Right eye refractive data from non-cycloplegic retinoscopy was analysed for 1,936 children aged 4 to 12 years who underwent a full eye examination whilst on a vision science excursion to the Vision Education Centre Clinic at the University of New South Wales. Myopia was defined as spherical equivalents equal to or less than -0.50 D, and hyperopia as spherical equivalents greater than +0.50 D. RESULTS: The mean spherical equivalent decreased significantly (p < 0.0001) with age from +0.73 ± 0.1D (SE) at age 4 to +0.21 ± 0.11D at age 12 years. The proportion of children across all ages with myopia of -0.50D or more was 8.4%, ranging from 2.3% of 4 year olds to 14.7% of 12 year olds. Hyperopia greater than +0.50D was present in 38.4%. A 3-way ANOVA for cohort, age and gender of both the current and our previous data showed a significant main effect for age (p < 0.0001) but not for cohort (p = 0.134) or gender (p = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of our new data with our early 1990s data and that from studies of over 8,000 Australian non-clinical rural and urban children in the 1970's and 1980's provided no evidence for the rapidly increasing prevalence of myopia described elsewhere in the world. In fact, the prevalence of myopia in Australian children continues to be significantly lower than that reported in Asia and North America despite changing demographics. This raises the issue of whether these results are a reflection of Australia's stable educational system and lifestyle over the last 30 years
Prevalence of refractive error in Europe: the European Eye Epidemiology (E3) Consortium
Changes of the ocular refraction among freshmen in National Taiwan University between 1988 and 2005
Comparative study on the safety and efficacy of different cycloplegic agents in children with darkly pigmented irides
Perceptions of human capital measures: from corporate executives and investors
Purpose This study compared the perceptions of executives and investors in terms of the importance to disclose human capital measures and their knowledge of those measures. Design/methodology/approach Forty-nine senior-level executives (41 % response rate) from service-oriented, public-listed companies in Australia and 33 investors (47% response rate) from various fund management companies responded to our survey. Findings The investors indicated the importance to disclose certain human capital measures more than the executives. The executives appeared to show a better understanding than the investors on indicators such as staff satisfaction index, staff capacity, motivational index, workforce stability, and workforce competence profile. Implications To date, researchers have explored human capital from a piecemeal perspective. A more integrated and multifaceted measure of human capital has the potential to benefit fund managers and executives. Disclosure of value added by employees, composition of staff (full-time, contract, or temporary), staff turnover, average years of experience, and average age of management and operational staff would shed some light on investment decisions for fund managers. Executives could utilize the measures to reflect on an assortment of human capital issues that are relevant to their organizations and stakeholders, especially the investment community. Originality/value This study proposed a more inclusive measure of human capital by integrating traditional measures of human capital and non-accounting measures (e.g., educational level, experience, and motivation). A comparison of the perspectives of executives and investors revealed preferences for certain information, which can help to improve the perception of transparency and accountability