Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective To determine the prevalence of computer vision syndrome (CVS) and its associated factors among university lecturers in Malaysia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 174 lecturers from Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) and Universiti Teknologi MARA (UITM) between March and May 2021. A self-administered questionnaire, validated and pretested among 40 respondents, was used to collect data on sociodemographic characteristics, working characteristics, working conditions, and computer vision syndrome (CVS) symptoms. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression were used to examine associations between the study variables and CVS. Exploratory machine-learning models were also constructed to examine the combined contribution of these factors to CVS. Results The prevalence of CVS was 77.6% (135/174). The most frequently reported symptoms were eye fatigue (52.3%), headache (44.3%), and eye strain (43.1%). University, working hours, seating distance, computer glasses, eye examination, and eye lubrication were associated with CVS in the chi-square analysis. In the multivariable logistic regression, only university affiliation remained an independent predictor of CVS (aOR = 2.79, 95% CI: 1.27–6.11, p = 0.010), with UITM lecturers having approximately 2.8 times higher odds of CVS compared with UPM lecturers. In the exploratory machine-learning analysis, the random forest model achieved the best overall performance (AUC = 0.70), with university, working hours during COVID-19, and seating distance identified as the leading predictors. Conclusion CVS was highly prevalent among university lecturers during the COVID-19 pandemic. University affiliation was the only independent predictor of CVS after adjustment for confounders. Work-related and workstation-related factors were associated with CVS and should be considered in occupational health interventions targeting lecturers who work long hours with computing devices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: