Hamer_e000046.full.pdf (271.94 kB)
Physical inactivity in relation to self-rated eyesight: cross-sectional analysis from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing
journal contributionposted on 2016-12-16, 11:48 authored by Lee Smith, Matthew A. Timmis, Shahina Pardhan, Keziah Latham, James Johnstone, Mark Hamer
Background: To assess the cross-sectional association between self-rated eyesight and physical activity behaviour in a large general population sample of older English adults. Methods: Analyses of data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Participants provided information on self-rated eyesight (categorised as: excellent/ very good/ good/ fair-poor) and their own physical activity levels (categorised as: inactive/ moderate only at least 1/ week/ vigorous at least 1/ week). Associations between self-rated eyesight and physical activity levels were examined using logistic regression. Results: A total of 6,634 participants (mean age 65.0±9.2years) were included in the analyses. In adjusted logistic regression models those with fair-poor and good eyesight were significantly more likely to be inactive than those who reported excellent eyesight (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.58, 2.72; OR 1.59, 1.27, 1.99, respectively). Conclusion: In this sample of older English adults, those with self-rated fair-poor vision were over twice as likely to be physically inactive than those who reported having excellent vision. When consistent data has emerged, interventions to increase physical activity in those who have poor eyesight are needed.
- Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences
Published inBMJ Open Ophthalmology
CitationSMITH, L. ... et al., 2017. Physical inactivity in relation to self-rated eyesight: cross-sectional analysis from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. BMJ Open Ophthalmology, 1, e000046.
- NA (Not Applicable or Unknown)
Publisher statementThis work is made available according to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
NotesThis is an Open Access Article. It is published by BMJ under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported Licence-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC). Full details of this licence are available at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/