Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

2 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2026

Differences in circadian rhythm changes between myopic and non-myopic college students over 2 years.

This study aimed to characterize and compare the differences in circadian rhythm changes during 2 years between college students with myopia and non-myopia based on a longitudinal cohort study. Wake-up time and bedtime were obtained through a self-administered questionnaire. Chronotype was assessed using the reduced Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (rMEQ). Circadian rhythm timing was determined by dim-light melatonin onset (DLMO), measured through hourly saliva collection from 21:00 to 01:00. A total of 450 college students (146 [32.4%] males) with a mean age of 18.65 ± 1.05 years were included, of whom 353 (78.4%) students had myopia. Compared with non-myopic individuals, myopic students slept later, woke up earlier, and exhibited lower rMEQ scores at baseline. Over the 2-year follow-up, both groups showed significantly earlier bedtimes, later wake-up times, and higher rMEQ scores. Only myopic students demonstrated a 45-minute delay in DLMO after the 2-year follow-up. After adjusting for potential confounders, linear mixed-effects models showed that myopic individuals had later bedtimes and earlier wake-up times. These findings indicate significant circadian rhythm changes in individuals with myopia, suggesting the potential of targeted sleep rhythm interventions on preventing myopia.

Myopia↗
PubMed2026

Approaches to observational study designs and analytical options to evaluate the safety of multi-dose vaccines: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Observational studies require careful considerations when evaluating the safety of multidose vaccines. We reviewed design and analytical approaches in observational studies evaluating the safety of multidose vaccines in the post-licensure phase. METHODS: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus (2018-2022) were searched for hypothesis-testing studies evaluating the safety of multidose vaccines. Key features from frequently used designs were extracted. RESULTS: Among 123 eligible studies, cohort (46%) and self-controlled case series (SCCS)/self-controlled risk interval (SCRI) (40%) followed by case-control (12%) were the most common designs, and 15% of studies used multiple designs. Among cohort studies evaluating multiple doses, vaccination date (36%) and cohort entry with time-updated exposure status (32%) were frequent approaches used to define time zero. Twenty-eight percent of cohort studies did not report time zero; all but one evaluated COVID-19 vaccine effect on post-delivery and fertility-related outcomes. For SCCS/SCRI, 64% of studies accounted for event-dependent exposures, mainly by including pre-exposure periods (53%) and modified SCCS model (48%), while 20% employed multiple correction strategies. Among studies using multiple designs, 68% reached consistent conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: SCCS/SCRI and cohort designs dominate multidose vaccine safety studies. Clear reporting on time zero in pregnancy and fertility-related cohort studies, and on addressing event-dependent exposures in SCCS/SCRI studies is needed, along with guidance on interpreting results from multiple designs.

Humans↗