4.6 Article

Effects of consumption of coffee, tea, or soft drinks on open-angle glaucoma: Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2010 to 2011

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 15, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236152

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We sought to investigate the association between consumption of coffee, tea, or soft drinks and risk of open-angle glaucoma (OAG) among Koreans using nationwide population-based data. This cross-sectional survey was performed through the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2010 to 2011. Participants older than 19 years were included in the sample for analysis after excluding those with any missing data. The diagnosis of OAG was based on the International Society of Geographical and Epidemiological Ophthalmology criteria, and participants without glaucomatous optic neuropathy served as controls. The frequency of beverage consumption during the past 12 months was obtained through a questionnaire. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine the relationship between consumption of each type of beverage and prevalence of OAG. A total of 6,681 participants was included in the analysis. The prevalence of OAG was 4.4% (n = 323), including 5.4% (n = 169) among men and 3.5% (n = 154) among women. After adjusting for multiple covariates, coffee consumption was significantly associated with OAG, while no significant association was found between consumption of tea or soft drinks and OAG. Participants who drank coffee had a higher risk of having OAG compared with those who did not drink coffee (odds ratio [OR], 2.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-4.72; p = 0.011). In sex-stratified analyses, the robust association of coffee consumption with OAG was observed in men (OR, 3.98; 95% CI, 1.71-9.25; p = 0.001) but not in women. Our results suggest that coffee consumption may affect the risk of OAG, particularly in men.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available