Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2020 Sep 3;15(9):e0237891. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237891

Prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, May 2019

Sofonias Addis Fekadu 1,*, Abel Sinshaw Assem 1,#, Nebiyat Feleke Adimassu 1,#
Editor: James Wolffsohn2
PMCID: PMC7470263  PMID: 32881888

Abstract

Introduction

A pterygium is a wing-shaped fibro-vascular growth of conjunctiva on the superficial cornea/conjunctiva. It is an elastotic degeneration of conjunctival stroma mainly due to Ultraviolet light exposure. The prevalence of pterygium varies in different environmental conditions. Its magnitude varies widely from 1.1% to 53% globally and in Ethiopia, it reaches from 8.8% to 38.7%.

Objective

To determine the prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, 2019.

Methods and materials

A community based cross-sectional study was conducted from April 15 to May 3, 2019, in Gambella town. A total of 402 study participants were selected using a systematic random sampling technique. A pre-tested semi-structured questionnaire, torch, and magnifying loops were used to collect data. The data was entered into epidemiological information 7.1 and exported to statistical package for social science version 20 for analysis. The binary and multivariate logistic regression analysis model was fitted to identify factors associated with pterygium. Odds ratio with respected 95% CI was used to identify the direction and strength of association.

Results

A total of 400 participants were examined with a response rate of 99.50%. The mean age of the study participants was 39.9±9.8years. The prevalence of pterygium among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town was 127(31.80%), (95% CI: 27.3, 36.3). male sex (AOR = 2.10 (95% CI: 1.26, 3.45), sunlight exposure (AOR = 6.86 (95% CI: 4.00, 11.79) and outdoor works (AOR = 2.10 (95% CI: 1.21, 3.60) were positively associated with pterygium whereas wearing sunglass/hat was a protective factor.

Conclusion

The prevalence of pterygium was high among adults living in Gambella town. Wearing sunglass/hat and reducing exposure time to the sun was important to reduce the development of pterygium in adults.

Introduction

A pterygium is a wing-shaped fibro-vascular growth of conjunctiva on the superficial cornea/conjunctiva and is an elastotic degeneration of conjunctival stroma mainly due to Ultraviolet(UV) light exposure [1, 2]. It is one of the most common disorders of the cornea that degrades the visual performance of the eye [3]. The prevalence of pterygium varies from 1.1% to 53% globally in different environmental conditions [47] and in Ethiopia, it reaches from 8.8% to 38.7% [8]. It has a higher magnitude in countries that are closer to the equator due to a higher level of outdoor UV exposure [9].

A fibro-vascular growth that encroaches the nasal /temporal cornea causes visual disturbance/reduction due to astigmatism [6, 10]. Pterygium is asymptomatic at the beginning [11] but, as it progresses it decreases visual function secondary to loss of corneal transparency within the pupillary area and increases irregular corneal astigmatism [15]. If a pterygium is left untreated, it is potentially blinding disease that causes personal, social, and economic cost [1214] and accounts for 2.2% of total blindness causes in at least one eye [15]. Redness, ocular irritation, dryness, and ocular discomfort are common ocular symptoms raised by patients with pterygium [16, 17]. As fibro-vascular growth reaches at the limbus, mid iris, pupil margin, and covers the whole pupil, clinically they are graded as grade 1,2,3, and 4, respectively [17, 18].

Many studies done in different areas of the world indicated that exposure to ultraviolet radiation, geographical latitude near to the equator, outdoor activity [19], aging, male gender [20], and dusty environment are possible risk factors of pterygium [7, 11, 21]. As ultraviolet radiation is the major risk factor to pterygium [2, 9] wearing sunglasses with UV protective lens and brimmed hats are recommended [9, 11]. Refractive correction for astigmatisms, artificial tears, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory eye drops, and surgery [16, 17, 22] are the most common management options of pterygium depending on its stage [9]. The indications for pterygium surgery include; unusual occurrence to the cornea (cosmetic issue), if it extends close to the visual axis, when it restricts eye movement, when it causes visual loss from astigmatism, and when a patient reports growth of the pterygium [16].

Most of the studies in different areas did not show the determinants of the disease at the community level and as the best of our search, there are no studies that determine even the magnitude of pterygium in the study area. Therefore, the main aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia.

Methods and materials

Study design, setting and population

A community based cross-sectional study was applied from April 15 to May 3, 2019. This study was carried out in Gambella town which is 777 kilometers away from Addis Ababa, capital city of Ethiopia. The town has dry, hot, and humid environment located in 527 meters above sea level. It has a population size of 76,140 with adult population of 46,787 and has 11,092 households. The study includes all adults aged 18 years and above who lives in the town. Adults with severe illness and sever ocular injuries during data collection were excluded from the study.

Sample size determination

The sample size was calculated using a single population proportion formula for the proportion of pterygium. By taking a similar study done in Ethiopia with a proportion of 38.7% [8], 95% confidence level, 5% margin of error, and 10% non-response rate the final minimum sample size for this study was determined to be 402.

Sampling techniques and procedures

The Participants of this study were selected by using systematic random sampling technique. A list of households was taken from each of the 7 kebeles administration (smallest administrative unit). After calculating the interval as “28” by dividing the total households in the town to the sample size calculated (402), lottery method was used to select the starting house. Every 28th house was used to conduct the study by assuming that each house contains at least one adult.

Operational definitions

Sun exposure

Participants who are exposed 5 hours and above per day were considered exposed whereas those participants who exposed below 5 hours per day were considered as non-exposed [2325].

Outdoor workers

It includes; farmers, gas/electric workers, miners, recreational workers, watermen, postmen, welders, and others whose activities are away from their house/office [16, 26] for five and more hours per day for five years and above [25].

Pterygium grading

Grading was done according to the position of head of the fibrovascular growth to the cornea.

  • Grade I: the head of the pterygium touches/reaches the limbus.

  • Grade II: the head of the pterygium reaches between the limbus and undiluted pupil margin.

  • Grade III: the head of the pterygium reaches the pupil margin.

  • Grade IV: the head of the pterygium reaches within the pupil area [23, 26].

Dust exposure

A person having at least a history of one episode of exposure to dusty environment that causes their eye to be irritated, itchy and red within the past 6 months [27].

Sun glass use

Participants who used any type of glass (cosmetics, general and specially treated) for the purpose of protection from sun during their outdoor activities [28, 29].

Data collection tools and procedure

The data collection tool (questionnaire) was developed by reviewing different works of literature on similar studies [8, 11, 13, 24]. Binocular magnifying loops and ophthalmic torches were used in the examination part of the study to detect the presence of pterygium. The data was collected using two optometrists and one ophthalmic nurse under one supervisor. Appropriate training was given to the data collectors on how to collect data, the ways on how approach to study participants and examination techniques of pterygium before data collection.

The data collectors introduced themselves to the head of the house when they reach the selected houses. After explaining the purpose of the study and getting a written consent, data were collected from adults by interviewing and physical examination. Double check up was carried out, when the selected houses were closed during the data collection. If the houses did not open in the next days again, next houses were included in the study. Lottery method was applied to select participants in a house that contains more than one adult. After completing the interview each study participants were examined by using binocular magnifying loops and ophthalmic torches. All participants were advised about the characteristics, risk factors and possible management options of pterygium. Finally, study participants who were examined as pterygium were referred to the nearby hospitals. In addition, other suspected eye diseases were also advised and referred accordingly depending on the nature of the cases.

Data quality assurance

The English version of questionnaire was translated to a similar form of Amharic version and back to English by language professional to increase the accuracy and consistency level of the questionnaire. The Supervisor and data collectors had given appropriate and sufficient training on the ways of face to face interview as well as examination techniques of pterygium in the community with the help of principal investigator. The questionnaire was pre-tested in five percent of the sample (21 participants) in Abol town which is 15 kilometers away from Gambella town before the data collection period. Modifications were done accordingly to ensure the appropriateness and common understanding of the study material/tool. Data quality was controlled by a close follow-up of the data collection process by the supervisor. Completeness of the data was checked by the principal investigator on each day. After completing data collection, each questionnaire was checked for completeness and the correct entrance of the data was cheeked by the investigator.

Data processing and analysis

Data cleaning and preparation was done to check for completeness of the data. The collected data were cleaned, coded, and entered into Epi info 7.1 and exported to the statistical package of social sciences (SPSS) version 20 for analysis. The descriptive statistics were summarized using summary statistics such as frequency tables, graphs, percentages, means, and standard deviations. To assess the influence of demographic, socio-demographic, environmental, and behavioral factors on pterygium, odds ratios (OR) were calculated with a significant test (p-value) and a 95% confidence level. Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness of fit was used to check for model fitness. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the association between the independent variable and pterygium. All variables in bivariable analysis with p ≤ 0.25 were entered into a multivariable logistic regression to identify the factors associated with pterygium. Adjusted odds ratios along with 95% confidence interval in multivariable analysis, were used to determine the strength and direction of the statistical association between independent variables and pterygium.

Ethical approval and consent to participate

Ethical clearance was obtained from the University of Gondar ethical review committee and a letter of permission was obtained from Gambella regional health office and Gambella town administrative office. Before starting the examination, written consent was taken from each study participant. They were given full right to participate and to refuse or withdraw at any time they want. Confidentiality of the information obtained was assured by avoiding personal identifiers like a name from the data collection tool and also through coding and locking the data.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of the study participants

There were 400 study participants in the assessment of pterygium with a response rate of 99.50%. The mean age of the study participants was 39.9 ± 9.8years. More than half 219(54.75%) of the study participants were males and slightly higher than two-third 273(68.25%) of the participants were living in rural areas.

Among the study participants, almost half 206(51.50%) were married and 179(44.80%) had a family size of 4–6 children in a house. Only 114 (28.50%) of the participants could read and write as well as 164(41.00%) were merchants (Table 1).

Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics of study participants in a study conducted to assess the prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, 2019 (n = 400).

Variables Frequency Percent (%)
Age group
20–40 years 212 53.00
40–60 years 176 44.00
>60 years 12 3.00
Sex
Male 219 54.80
Female 181 45.20
Marital status
Married 206 51.50
Widowed 99 24.80
Divorced 44 11.00
Single 51 12.70
Family size
0–3 141 35.20
4–6 179 44.80
≥ 7 80 20.00
Educational level
Unable to read write 56 14.00
Able to read and write 114 28.50
Primary school 113 28.30
Secondary school 94 23.40
College/university 23 5.80
Occupation
Student 24 6.00
Farmer/labor 40 10.00
Employed 153 38.30
Merchant 164 41.00
Others * 19 4.70

*Housewife, priests.

Environmental and behavioral factors of study participants

More than half 212(53.00%) of the participants had a history of sun exposure for five and more hours per day. Whereas only 97(24.30%) use sunglass/hat for protection (Table 2). Besides, almost three-fourth of the study participants 294(73.40%) never use any alcohol product and only 63 (15.80%) had a family history of pterygium (Table 3).

Table 2. Environmental factors of study participants in a study conducted to assess the prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, 2019 (n = 400).

Variables Frequency Percent
Sun exposure
Yes 212 53.00
No 188 47.00
Working area
Outdoor 155 38.70
Indoor 245 61.30
Dust exposure
Yes 161 40.30
No 239 59.70
Sunglass use
Yes 97 24.30
No 303 75.70

Table 3. Behavioral factors among study participants in a study conducted to assess the prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, 2019 (n = 400).

Variables Frequency Percent
Alcohol use
Never 294 73.40
Past 55 13.80
Current 51 12.80
Smoking
Never 319 79.70
Past 41 10.30
Current 40 10.00
History of traditional medication
Yes 58 14.50
No 342 85.50

Prevalence of pterygium

The overall prevalence of pterygium among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town was 127(31.80%), (95% CI: 27.30, 36.30) in either eye (Fig 1). Most of the pterygium 101(79.53%) was located to the nasal side of the cornea and the rest 26(20.47%) was located to the temporal part of the cornea. More than half 69(54.33%) of the pterygium was unilateral and the remaining 58(45.67%) was bilateral.

Fig 1. Proportion and grades of pterygium among adults living in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, 2019 (n = 127).

Fig 1

Factors associated with pterygium

From the bi-variable logistic analysis 10 variables including; sex being male, address being rural, work area being outdoor, dust exposure, wearing of sunglass/hat, and occupation being farmer, low-level of education, smoking, sun exposure, and marital status being married were independently associated with the occurrence pterygium with a significant level of p ≤ 0.25. The multivariable logistic analysis revealed that only four variables which include; sex being male, a working area being outdoor, sun exposure, and wearing of sunglass/hat were independently associated with the occurrence of pterygium.

The odds of developing pterygium among adult male participants were 2.10 times more likely than females (AOR = 2.10 (95% CI: 1.26, 3.45)). Those adults who were exposed to sunlight were 6.86 times more likely to develop pterygium as compared to those who were not exposed to sunlight (AOR = 6.86 (95% CI: 4.00, 11.79). Also, the odds of developing pterygium among adults with an outdoor working environment were 2.10 times more likely as compared to those with an indoor working environment (AOR = 2.10(95% CI: 1.21, 3.60)). On the other side, adults who were using sunglasses/hats for protection were 62% less likely to develop pterygium as compared to those who did not wear sunglasses/hats (Table 4).

Table 4. Factors associated with pterygium in a study conducted to assess the prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, 2019 (n = 400).

Variables Pterygium COR (95% CI) AOR (95% CI)
Yes No
Sex
Female 54 165 1.00
Male 73 108 2.07(1.35,3.17) 2.10(1.26, 3.45) **
Address
Urban 49 79 1.00
Rural 78 195 1.57(1.01,2.45)
Dust exposure
No 81 154 1.00
Yes 46 119 1.36 (0.88, 2.10)
Sun exposure
No 94 94 1.00
Yes 33 179 5.42(3.40, 8.67) 6.86(4.00, 11.79) ***
Marital status
Single 18 33 1.00
Married 53 153 1.58(0.82, 3.03)
Widowed 36 63 0.96(0.47, 1.93)
Divorced 20 24 0.66(0.29, 1.50
Occupation
Student 9 15 1.00
Farmer 9 31 2.10(0.68, 6.28)
Employed 46 107 1.40(0.57, 3.42)
Merchant 55 109 1.19(0.49, 2.89)
Others* 8 11 0.83(0.24, 2.82)
Working area
Indoor 90 155 1.00
Outdoor 37 118 1.85(1.18, 2.91) 2.10(1.21, 3.60) **
Smoking
Never 96 223 1.00
Past 19 22 0.50(0.26, 0.98)
Current 12 28 1.00(0.49, 2.05)
Educational level of house head
Unable to write &read 13 43 2.54 (0.91, 7.12)
Primary school 61 166 2.10 (0.87, 5.00)
Secondary school 43 51 0.91(0.36, 2.29)
College/university 10 13 1.00
Educational level recoded
Lower level of education 114 230 1.64(0.85, 3.17)
Higher level of education 13 43 1.00
Sunglass/hat use
Yes 107 192 0.44(0.26, 0.76) 0.39(0.21, 0.73) **
No 20 81 1.00

Abbreviations: COR = Crude odds ratio, AOR = Adjusted odds ratio, *House wife, priests ** P-value <0.05, *** p<0.001.

Discussion

The magnitude of pterygium varies widely from 1.1% to 53% globally [47]. This is the first community based cross-sectional study on pterygium in Gambella town among adults. This study indicated that the overall prevalence of pterygium among adults in either eye was 127(31.80%), (95% CI: 27.3, 36.3).

This finding is higher as compared to other community based studies done in a China(17.9%), (6.4%), and (11.75%) [4, 30, 31], Indonesia (10.00%) [32], Iran (9.4%), (1.3%), (11%), (13.11%), and (14.99%) [3, 14, 33, 34], Central Myanmar (19.6%) [13], South Korea (8.8%) and (6.7%) [10, 24], Malaya Singapore(12.3%) [35], India (13%) and (11.7%) [20, 36], Northern Japan (4.4%) [37], Spain (5.9%) [38] and Kolla diba, Ethiopia (18.5%) [23]. The possible reason behind our high finding could be it is carried out in a hot, dry, and dusty environment with low latitude that might contribute to the occurrence of pterygium [39, 40]. Furthermore, different geographical areas nearer to the equator (tropical area) have greater exposure to ultraviolet-B that intern contributes to the occurrence of pterygium [12, 19].

The proportion of pterygium in this study is similar to other studies done in Southwest, Japan (30.8%) [12], China (33.98%) [39]. Although these countries are located in different geographical areas, the possible reason might be all studies were carried out with similar study design.

On the other side, the proportion of pterygium in this study is lower than other studies done in Northwest Ethiopia (38.7%) [8]. This might due to geographical, latitudinal, economic, and environmental variations that contribute to the occurrence of the disease [19, 23]. The other possible reason could due to the age groups included in the studies. Adults aged 18 years and above were included in this study but, the study done in Gondar, Ethiopia includes adults age greater than 20 years that might contribute to the occurrence of the pterygium [4, 19, 21].

This study also indicated that the proportion of pterygium by its clinical appearance as grade I to IV. As a result, grade II pterygium was most common 56(44.00%) followed by grade I 34(26.70%). In addition, most of the pterygium 101(79.53%) was located on the nasal side of the cornea. In other works of literature, the most common reported grades were grade II both in Mongolian, China [4] (162/2651, 6.1%) and in Xinjiang, China [30] 258 (5.59%), grade I both in Gondar, Ethiopia [8] 97(24.87%) and Koladiba Ethiopia [23] 63(56.3%). In addition, most of the pterygium was located to the nasal side of the cornea in Mongolian, China [4] (38/2651, 1.4%), Bhagalpur, India [11] (93.49%), Gondar, Ethiopia [8] 149(98.7%), Koladiba Ethiopia [23] 87 (77.7%) and Xinjiang, China [30] (11.54%). Even though there is no clear justification for similarities and discrepancies of these results, different environmental areas, age groups included, study design applied, climatic conditions and UV exposure status of study participants might contribute to the disease conditions [6, 19, 21, 40].

The present study revealed that odds of developing pterygium among those working in an outdoor environment were 2.10 times more likely as compared to an indoor environment (AOR = 2.10 (95% CI: 1.21, 3.60)). This is supported by many studies done in Ethiopia [8, 23], Myanmar [13], Indonesia [25, 35], Japan [12], Iran [14], Central India [20], Mongolia China [4]. This might due to outdoor workers had a prolonged period of UV light as well as dust exposure as compared to indoor workers [4, 13, 19, 23].

Those adults who were exposed to sunlight five hours and above were 6.86 times more likely to develop pterygium than those who were not exposed (AOR = 6.86 (95% CI: 4.00, 11.79). This is in line with studies done in South Korea [24], Australia [5], India [36], Koladiba Ethiopia [23]. Although it is difficult to quantify the true amount of one’s exposure to sunlight with ultraviolet radiation, many studies had shown that outdoor workers have a higher risk of the development of pterygium [2, 24]. Even though some amount of ultraviolent is important for our body, exposure for five hours and more for acute or long time could cause disorders in skin, conjunctiva, cornea, and lens [2, 9, 19].

Lots of controversies are raised regarding the association of gender and pterygium in different kinds of literature. This study showed that being male was 2.10 times more likely to develop pterygium as compared to females. This result is supported by studies done in Ethiopia [8], Australia [5], China [1, 26, 41], Japan [12], Malaya Indonesia [35], and Central India [20]. Males spent most of their time in outdoor activities in most African countries including Ethiopia. This might intern expose them to develop pterygium [8]. Whereas a study in South Korea [24] showed that being female was associated with pterygium. In contrast, studies in Japan [37], China [4, 30], and Iran [34] indicated that there were no significant differences in the association of gender and pterygium. Cultural differences, differences in ethnicity, and varied environmental factors could affect the exposure status of males and females for pterygium [21].

On the other side, adults who wore sunglass/hat were 62% less likely to develop pterygium as compared to those who did not wear sunglass/hat. This is consistent with studies done in Gondar, Ethiopia [8], and Benin City, Nigeria [42]. The possible reason could be wearing hat/protective sunglasses might reduce the exposure status from UV light [36] and dust particles that might also reduce the development of pterygium [5].

Conclusion

The prevalence of pterygium was high among adults living in Gambella town. Genders being male, outdoor working area, and sunlight exposure were positively associated with the development of pterygium. Whereas wearing sunglass/hat was a protective factor for the development of pterygium. Sunlight exposure and outdoor activities were the only modifiable risk factors.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Multivariable analysis final out put in a study to assess prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia.

(DOCX)

S1 File. Questionnaire and data extraction MS format to the study of prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia.

(DOCX)

S2 File. Sav original data showing the association of different variables in study to assess the prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia.

(SAV)

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the Gambella regional health office and Gambella town administrative office for their technical support to carry out this research.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Beijing T, Study E. Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Pterygium in Adult Chinese. 2007; 1184–6. [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 2.Oliva MS, Taylor H. Ultraviolet radiation and the eye. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2005; 45(1):1–17. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Yasemi M, Bamdad S, Sarokhani D, Sarokhani M, Sayemiri K, Ali N. Electronic Physician (ISSN: 2008-5842). 2017; (December):5914–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Wang Y, Shan G, Gan L, Qian Y, Chen T, Wang H, et al. Prevalence and associated factors for pterygium in Han and Mongolian adults: a cross-sectional study in inner Mongolian, China. BMC Ophthalmol. 2020. February;20(1):45 10.1186/s12886-020-1324-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.McCarty CA, Fu CL, Taylor HR. Epidemiology of pterygium in Victoria, Australia. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000. March; 84(3):289–92. 10.1136/bjo.84.3.289 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Liu L, Wu J, Geng J, Yuan Z, Huang D. Geographical prevalence and risk factors for pterygium: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2013; 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003787. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 7.Jiao W, Zhou C, Wang T, Yang S, Bi H, Liu L, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for pterygium in rural older adults in Shandong Province of China: a cross-sectional study. BioMed Res Int. 2014; 2014:658648 10.1155/2014/658648 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Anbesse DH, Kassa T, Kefyalew B, Tasew A, Atnie A, Desta B. Prevalence and associated factors of pterygium among adults living in Gondar city, Northwest Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2017. March; 12(3):e0174450 10.1371/journal.pone.0174450 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Saw S, Tan D, Tan D. Pterygium: prevalence, demography and risk factors. 2009; 6586. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Hyung T, Rim T, Nam J, Kim EK, Kim T. Risk Factors Associated With Pterygium and Its Subtypes in Korea. The Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. 2008–2010; 2013:962–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Prevalence SOF, Factors R, Pterygium FOR, Bihar E. STUDY OF PREVALENCE AND RISK FACTORS FOR PTERYGIUM IN Uday Narayan Singh Punit Parasurampuria * * Corresponding Author. 2019; 426(12):75–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Shiroma H, Higa A, Sawaguchi S, Iwase A, Tomidokoro A, Amano S, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of pterygium in a southwestern island of Japan: the Kumejima Study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009. November; 148(5):766–771 10.1016/j.ajo.2009.06.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Durkin SR, Abhary S, Newland HS, Selva D, Aung T, Casson RJ. The prevalence, severity and risk factors for pterygium in central Myanmar: the Meiktila Eye Study: 25–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Rezvan F, Hashemi H, Emamian MH, Kheirkhah A. The Prevalence and Determinants of Pterygium and Pinguecula in an Urban Population in Shahroud. Iran; 2012. p. 5. [PubMed]
  • 15.Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Etya’ale D et al. World health organization; Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002. Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Etya’ale D, al Glob data Vis Impair year 2002 Bull World Heal Organ 2004;82844–51. 2002; 82:844–51. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Hirst LW. MAJOR REVIEW The Treatment Of Pterygium. 2003; 48(2). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Concepts C, Implications T. The Pathogenesis of Pterygium: 2008; 6(1). [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Paula JS, Thorn F, Cruz AA V. Prevalence of pterygium and cataract in indigenous populations of the Brazilian Amazon rain forest. 2006;(December 2004):5336 10.1038/sj.eye.6701917. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Nemet AY, Vinker S, Segal O, Mimouni M, Kaiserman I. Epidemiology and Associated Morbidity of Pterygium: A Large, Community-Based Case-Control Study. Semin Ophthalmol. 2016;31(5):446–51. 10.3109/08820538.2014.962169 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Nangia V, Jonas JB, Nair D, Saini N, Nangia P. Panda- S. Prevalence and Associated Factors for Pterygium in Rural Agrarian Central India. The Central India Eye and Medical Study. 2013;8(12):1–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Song P, Chang X, Wang M, An L. Variations of pterygium prevalence by age, gender and geographic characteristics in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Vol. 12. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):e0174587 10.1371/journal.pone.0174587. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Chalkia AK, Spandidos DA, Detorakis ET. Viral involvement in the pathogenesis and clinical features of ophthalmic pterygium (Review) [Review]. Int J Mol Med. 2013. September;32(3):539–43. 10.3892/ijmm.2013.1438 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Alemayehu TK, Addis Y, Bizuneh ZY, Tegegne M, Alemayehu AM. Prevalence and associated factors of pterygium among adults living in Kolla diba town. Northwest Ethiopia; 2019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 24.Pyo EY, Mun GH, Yoon KC. The prevalence and risk factors for pterygium in South Korea: the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) 2009–2010. 2016;1–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 25.Gazzard G, Saw SM, Farook M, Koh D, Widjaja D, Chia SE, et al. Pterygium in Indonesia: prevalence, severity and risk factors. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002. December;86(12):1341–6. 10.1136/bjo.86.12.1341 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Wong TYIN, Foster PJ, Johnson GJ, Seah SKL, Tan DTH. The Prevalence and Risk Factors for Pterygium The Tanjong Pagar Survey. 2001;9394(C):0–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.De Smedt SK, Nkurikiye J, Fonteyne YS, Tuft SJ, Gilbert CE, Kestelyn P. Vernal keratoconjunctivitis in school children in rwanda: Clinical presentation, impact on school attendance, and access to medical care. Ophthalmology [Internet]. 2012;119(9):1766–72. Available from: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.03.041 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Backes C, Religi A, Moccozet L, Behar-Cohen F, Vuilleumier L, Bulliard JL, et al. Sun exposure to the eyes: predicted UV protection effectiveness of various sunglasses. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol [Internet]. 2019;29(6):753–64. Available from: 10.1038/s41370-018-0087-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Chorley AC, Evans BJW, Benwell MJ. Solar eye protection practices of civilian aircrew. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2015;86(11):953–61. 10.3357/AMHP.4357.2015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Chen T, Ding L, Shan G, Ke L, Ma J, Zhong Y. Prevalence and racial differences in pterygium: A cross- sectional study in han and uygur adults in Xinjiang, China. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(2):1109–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Lu J, Wang Z, Lu P, Chen X, Zhang W, Shi K, et al. Pterygium in an aged Mongolian population: a population-based study in China. Eye (Lond). 2009. February;23(2):421–7. 10.1038/sj.eye.6703005 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Gazzard G, Saw SM, Farook M, Koh D, Widjaja D, Chia SE, et al. Pterygium in Indonesia: prevalence, severity and risk factors. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002. December;86(12):1341–6. 10.1136/bjo.86.12.1341 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Fotouhi A, Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Mohammad K. Prevalence and risk factors of pterygium and pinguecula: the Tehran Eye Study. 2009;(February 2008):1125–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Yekta A, Jafarzadehpour E, Ostadimoghaddam H, Kangari H. The prevalence and determinants of pterygium in rural areas. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2017;29(3):194–8. 10.1016/j.joco.2016.09.002 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Cajucom-Uy H, Tong L, Wong TY, Tay WT, Saw SM. The prevalence of and risk factors for pterygium in an urban Malay population: the Singapore Malay Eye Study (SiMES). Br J Ophthalmol. 2010. August;94(8):977–81. 10.1136/bjo.2008.150847 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Marmamula S, Khanna RC, Rao GN. Population-based assessment of prevalence and risk factors for pterygium in the South Indian state of Andhra Pradesh: the Andhra Pradesh Eye Disease Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013. August;54(8):5359–66. 10.1167/iovs.13-12529 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Tano T, Ono K, Hiratsuka Y, Otani K, Sekiguchi M, Konno S, et al. Prevalence of pterygium in a population in Northern Japan: the Locomotive Syndrome and Health Outcome in Aizu Cohort Study. Acta Ophthalmol. 2013. May;91(3):e232–6. 10.1111/aos.12044 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Viso E, Gude F. Prevalence of pinguecula and pterygium in a general population in Spain. 2011;(November 2010):350–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Rezvan F, Khabazkhoob M, Hooshmand E, Yekta A, Saatchi M, Hashemi H. Prevalence and risk factors of pterygium: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surv Ophthalmol. 2018. Sep—Oct;63(5):719–35. 10.1016/j.survophthal.2018.03.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Modenese A, Gobba F. Occupational exposure to solar radiation at different latitudes and pterygium: A systematic review of the last 10 years of scientific literature. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Wu K, He M, Xu J, Li S. Pterygium in aged population in Doumen County, China. Yan ke xue bao (2016). 2002. September;18(3):181–184. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Ukponmwan CU, Dawodu OA, Edema OP, Okojie O. Prevalence of pterygium and pingueculum among motorcyclists in Nigeria. Vol. 84, East African Medical Journal. 2007. p. 516–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

James Wolffsohn

23 Jul 2020

PONE-D-20-18073

Prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, May 2019

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Fekadu,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. The reviewers are very complimentary of you manuscript, but there are a few minor clarifications to address

Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 06 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

James Wolffsohn, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with the following previous publication(s), which needs to be addressed:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0215528

In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Further consideration is dependent on these concerns being addressed.

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

"The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript"

At this time, please address the following queries:

  1. Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

  2. State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

  3. If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

  4. If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

5. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

6. Your ethics statement must appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please also ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics section of your online submission will not be published alongside your manuscript.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: As the authors note, there are a number of peer-reviewed publications on the epidemiology of pterygium. Sun exposure is causal. The data in this paper further confirm previous findings of risk factors in a unique population-based study. A few suggestions/questions:

1. How was dust exposure defined?

2. How was sunglass use defined? Did participants have to wear them for a certain percent of tie while outdoors to be considered 'yes'?

3. Self-reported family history of pterygium is not likely to be accurate and not relevant to this paper, so I suggest deleting.

4. p<0.25 is an unusual significance level to use. How do the results change is a p<0.10 is used?

5. The independent variables in the multivariate analysis are likely highly corrected, this making interpretation challenging. How was that taken into account?

6. If the data are available, it would be interesting to assess a possible dose response relationship between sun exposure and size of pterygium.

Reviewer #2: I found this article well written and the topic interesting. I applaud the authors for the diligence and success in gathering data for this study. Though not material to the work reported here, I think the author would also be interest in exploring the work on peripheral light focusing by Kwok and Coroneo for future research, as it would provide illumination regarding the impact of wearing sunglasses on exposure related to pterygium

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Catherine McCarty Wallerstein

Reviewer #2: Yes: Cristina Schnider

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Sep 3;15(9):e0237891. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237891.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


1 Aug 2020

Response to reviewers

Manuscript title: Prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, May 2019

Manuscript number: PONE-D-20-18073

Dear reviewers. Thank you for giving us the chance to revise and correct the manuscript accordingly. We are thankful so much and we appreciate you for careful and in-depth reading of this manuscript and for the thoughtful comments and constructive suggestions, which help us to improve the quality of this manuscript. Saying this we addressed all the concerns raised by you and incorporated our reflection in the revised manuscript. We tried to address all issues that are raised to be addressed.

Many thanks.

Reviewer reports:

Reviewer #1(Catherine McCarty Wallerstein): As the authors note, there are a number of peer-reviewed publications on the epidemiology of pterygium. Sun exposure is causal. The data in this paper further confirm previous findings of risk factors in a unique population-based study. A few suggestions/questions: 1. How was dust exposure defined?

Authors’ Response: Thank you! We accepted the comment and we included in the “operational definition” parts of the manuscript. Dust exposure: a person having at least a history of one episode of exposure to dusty environment that causes their eye to be irritated, itchy and red within the past 6 months(1).

Reviewer #1(Catherine McCarty Wallerstein): 2. How was sunglass use defined? Did participants have to wear them for a certain percent of tie while outdoors to be considered 'yes'?

Authors’ Response: Thank you! We accepted the comment and included in the operational definition part of the new revised manuscript. Sun glass use was defined as when participants used any type of glass(cosmetics, general and specially treated) for the purpose of protection from sun during their outdoor activities(2,3).

Reviewer #1(Catherine McCarty Wallerstein): 3. Self-reported family history of pterygium is not likely to be accurate and not relevant to this paper, so I suggest deleting.

Authors’ Response: Thank you! for the comment, the comment is accepted and we deleted it from the new edited manuscript.

Reviewer #1(Catherine McCarty Wallerstein): 4. p<0.25 is an unusual significance level to use. How do the results change is a p<0.10 is used?

Authors’ Response: Thank you! For the comment.

commonly used cutting point in bi-variable analysis to multivariable logistic regression is P< 0.20, but some statistician advice that when the variables that enter to multivariable analysis are fewer, it may possible to use the cutting point p<0. 25 and if we tried to use p< 0.10, variables will further be reduced and few not more than five will full fill the inclusion criteria which might reduce the precision of the study rather it is possible to enter all variables. in addition, the criteria developed in cutting the P-value in bivariable analysis is simply to reduce the number of variables that will inter to multivariable analysis. So, it is difficult to use p<.10, in our study since it will affect the whole outcome as well as statistical concept of the study.

Reviewer #1(Catherine McCarty Wallerstein): 5. The independent variables in the multivariate analysis are likely highly corrected, this making interpretation challenging. How was that taken into account.

Authors’ Response: Thank you! We write in such a way that, in order to be easily understand by the readers and the nature of the variables can not be compressed to a single word easily and we tried to write the manuscript so that the words can easily be understandable.

Reviewer #1(Catherine McCarty Wallerstein): 6. If the data are available, it would be interesting to assess a possible dose response relationship between sun exposure and size of pterygium.

Authors’ Response: Thank you! Since sun exposure was operationalized as “those who had exposure for five hours and above are considered as exposed and others as non-exposed” no separate dose of hour was included in the data. So, it is difficult to show the relationship between dose of sun exposure with size of pterygium.

Reviewer #2(Cristina Schnider): Thank you for your constructive comment and suggestion, we will try to conduct a future research in the topic/idea you suggested us and we hope we may face you again with that title.

Responses to accadamic editors

1. Response of authors: thank you, we tried to correct the manuscript to meet the Plos one’s criteria of manuscript formatting as much as possible.

2. Response of authors: thank you for your comment, we have already rephrased and correct the duplicated and overlapping texts in the new edited manuscript that were closer to the previous publication.

3. Response of authors: thank you,

A. As already mentioned previously, there were no a piece of financial and material support for this study, even the organization that employed us.

B. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

C. None of the authors received a salary from funders.

D. The authors received no specific funding for this work.

4. Thank you!

A. There is no ethical or legal restriction on sharing the data requested from us

B. Data are uploaded as “supporting information files” at the end of the new edited manuscript.

5. My ORCID iD is already updated from my PLOSE ONE account.

6. The ethics statement is already moved to method part in the new edited manuscript

References for comments reviewer # 1

1. De Smedt SK, Nkurikiye J, Fonteyne YS, Tuft SJ, Gilbert CE, Kestelyn P. Vernal keratoconjunctivitis in school children in rwanda: Clinical presentation, impact on school attendance, and access to medical care. Ophthalmology [Internet]. 2012;119(9):1766–72. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.03.041

2. Backes C, Religi A, Moccozet L, Behar-Cohen F, Vuilleumier L, Bulliard JL, et al. Sun exposure to the eyes: predicted UV protection effectiveness of various sunglasses. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol [Internet]. 2019;29(6):753–64. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41370-018-0087-0

3. Chorley AC, Evans BJW, Benwell MJ. Solar eye protection practices of civilian aircrew. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2015;86(11):953–61.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviwers.docx

Decision Letter 1

James Wolffsohn

5 Aug 2020

Prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, May 2019

PONE-D-20-18073R1

Dear Dr. Fekadu,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

James Wolffsohn, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Thank you for carefully incorporating the reviewers comments to enhance your manuscript.

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

James Wolffsohn

20 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-18073R1

Prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia, May 2019

Dear Dr. Fekadu:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Professor James Wolffsohn

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Multivariable analysis final out put in a study to assess prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia.

    (DOCX)

    S1 File. Questionnaire and data extraction MS format to the study of prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia.

    (DOCX)

    S2 File. Sav original data showing the association of different variables in study to assess the prevalence of pterygium and its associated factors among adults aged 18 years and above in Gambella town, Southwest Ethiopia.

    (SAV)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviwers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES