Abstract
Objectives:
Myopia is considered to be associated with depressive symptoms. Perceived parental control plays a critical role in children and adolescents’ mental health. The present study aimed to examine the role of myopia in depressive symptoms and whether parental control contributes to depressive symptoms via vision-related quality of life (QoL) in myopic students.
Methods:
This study investigated the mediating role of vision-related QoL between parental control and depressive symptoms among Chinese children and adolescents with myopia. A total of 2014 college freshmen in China were included. Correlation analysis and mediation analysis were conducted. Mediation models were used to assess the potential mechanism of vision-related QoL in the association between parental control and depressive symptoms.
Results:
In our sample, participants with myopia were less likely to develop depressive symptoms than those without myopia (P = 0.01). Subsequently, analysis within the myopic group revealed that vision-related QoL significantly mediated the relationship between parental control and depressive symptoms, accounting for 15.69% (maternal control) and 18.86% (paternal control) of the total effect.
Conclusions:
This study highlights the important role of myopia for depressive symptoms in college freshmen and demonstrates that vision-related QoL significant mediates the relationship between parental control and depressive symptoms.
Introduction
The prevalence of myopia has markedly increased during recent decades, especially in East Asia (). The prevalence of myopia in Shanghai has been reported as 95.5% (). A university-based study conducted between 2016 and 2021 found that myopia among mainland Chinese college freshmen in Tianjin remained both stable and elevated, ranging from 91.8% to 94.9% (). In Taiwan, a longitudinal study documented a marked increase from 91.3% (1988) to 95.9% (2005) among college freshmen (). Beyond its impact on vision, myopia imposes tremendous economic costs and elevates lifelong risks of secondary sequelae, including glaucoma and cataracts (), cementing its status as a critical public health priority. Myopia has become the main risk factor impeding the development of children and adolescents, and is considered a major public health concern.
Myopia has a significant impact on mental health, except for its well-known adverse consequences. Depression and depressive symptoms, as common psychological illnesses, have been proven to lead to suicide () and disability () in previous studies. The peak prevalence of depression generally occurs in the second and third decades of life, which indicates that children and adolescents are susceptible groups for depression (). Although the prevalence of clinical depression is low, depression symptoms are relatively common. Approximately 3.2% of US children have depression, while 17.3% of Singapore children suffer from depressive symptoms (). Previous studies support that psychological problems are associated with poor emotional regulation (). However, the relationship between myopia and depression remains complex and inconsistently reported. While some studies suggest a significantly higher risk of depression among students aged 13–17 years with myopia than in those without (), and a systematic review showed that children and adolescents with myopia report significantly higher depression scores than their emmetropic peers (standardized mean difference = 0.58) (), other investigations have found no significant association (, ). This inconsistency suggests that the link between myopia and depression may vary across populations and study designs, highlighting the need for further investigation in specific demographic groups. It should be noted that children and adolescents are a high-risk group for depression and depressive symptoms, and myopia may impose an additional psychological burden. However, its onset can also trigger adaptive health behaviours. Latent-class analysis revealed that 73.7% of myopic students belong to a “health-behaviour” subtype (). These behaviours, including increased physical activity and improved sleep hygiene, may exert an independent antidepressant effect ().
Myopia not only affects children and adolescents but also impacts and is reciprocally influenced by their family, especially immediate family members. Parents of children with myopia report markedly higher psychological distress than parents of non-myopic children; this distress is driven mainly by persistent concerns about visual prognosis and the long-term risk of sight-threatening complications (). To mitigate these anxieties and protect ocular health, parents may prefer to intensify behavioural-control strategies (). Parental control, in this context, includes actions such as regulating screen time, restricting physical activities for fear of injury, and mandating the consistent use of corrective lenses. These behaviours are measured using the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) in our study, which assesses the levels of control and affection in parental interactions. While moderate parental involvement in vision-protective practices, such as encouraging outdoor activity, decreases the risk of myopia (), excessive control, particularly psychological control, can independently impair children’s emotional regulation and overall mental well-being.
Previous studies have shown a significant association between parenting styles and quality of life (QoL), indicating that families play a critical role in increasing children and adolescents’ QoL (). Moreover, a cross-sectional survey conducted in China suggested that parenting styles were significantly associated with QoL (). Specifically in the context of myopia, vision-related QoL provides a multi-dimensional framework to capture the unique challenges faced by adolescents with visual impairment, encompassing physical function, emotional function, vision function and body performance, and social activity domains. Parenting styles influence children’s appraisals of bodily competence through physical self-esteem, which may contribute to depressive symptoms (, ). Overcontrolling parents, who prohibit “high-risk” physical activities or prioritize academic work over exercise, may inadvertently increase their children’s vulnerability to depression. Psychological control directly undermines university students’ self-worth and emotion-regulation capacity, fostering anxiety and, consequently, depressive symptoms (). Excessive parental intervention, such as mandating specific spectacles, accentuates the functional limitations and helplessness associated with visual impairment. Previous evidence has indicated that visual impairment and its functional restrictions are independent risk factors for depression (, ). Social support is considered as a protective factor against depression (, ). However, when parental control extends to the social domain, constraining friendships and limiting interaction time/space, both the quality and quantity of social support may diminish.
It has been reported that authoritative parenting may be beneficial to the psychological development of children and adolescents, meaning that parenting styles can affect the psychological well-being of offspring (). Similarly, a cohort study suggested that the mental health of children and adolescents is greatly affected by parenting styles (). Furthermore, the risk of depression and suicidal ideation may be increased by parental control and decreased by parental care (). Negative parenting styles, such as apathetic and controlling parenting, significantly increase the risk of depression, and the higher the levels of parental control are, the worse the depressive symptoms of adolescents () will become. In addition, previous studies found that QoL may decline due to the presence of depression (–) and improve after its remission ().
College freshmen are a stressful group in the Chinese context because they are experiencing a series of dramatic transitions in their lives (). Specifically, students in the first year of college are facing the sadness of parting with friends and family, heavy academic pressure and fear of being in a completely unfamiliar environment (). Therefore, stress levels escalate amidst this life upheaval, increasing their susceptibility to depression and anxiety (). Considering the high prevalence of myopia and a variety of adverse consequences caused by depression, it is imperative to understand the role of parents in the development of emotional adjustment in children and adolescents. In particular, frequent psychological distress associated with myopia in children and adolescents may hinder the completion of important developmental tasks to varying degrees.
Although current studies have uncovered the association between myopia and mental health, and have provided preliminary evidence for the associations among parental control, vision-related QoL, and depressive symptoms, several critical knowledge gaps remain. First, first-year university students, who confront simultaneous environmental, academic and identity transitions, remain under-studied. Second, the mediating pathways linking parental control to depressive symptoms via vision-related life have not been examined within myopic samples, and the cultural specificity of “overprotection” in Chinese families remains largely unexplored. These controlling behaviors (e.g., prioritizing academics over exercise, restricting social interactions, mandating specific vision correction methods) may be particularly salient or manifest in culturally specific ways within Chinese families, where academic achievement and safety concerns are often paramount. In this study we aim to (a) investigate the differences between college freshmen with myopia and without, (b) test the effects of parental control on depressive symptoms in college freshmen with myopia, and (c) examine whether the relationship between parental control and depressive symptoms is mediated by vision-related QoL in college freshmen with myopia. Overall, we tested the following two major hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1. The status of depressive symptoms differs between myopic and non-myopic participants.
Hypothesis 2. Parental control may contribute to depressive symptoms via vision-related QoL.
Methods
Study design and participants
The Dali University Students Eye Health Study was was conducted in 2021 and a school-based study conducted in Dali among college freshmen in Yunnan Province, located in the south-western part of China. According to official records, all freshmen (n = 2698) at Dali University were invited to participate in this study. Participants who were older than 26 years, submitted invalid questionnaires, or had eye diseases (i.e., keratoconus, acute infection) were excluded. Finally, a total of 2014 individuals completed physical examinations, underwent eye examinations including IOL Master and optical coherence tomography (OCT) and provided blood samples, and were thus included in this analysis. The characteristics of age, gender, ethnicity and parental myopia revealed no statistically significant differences between the included and excluded students.
Instruments
A standardized questionnaire was used to collect information on demographic variables (i.e., gender, age, and ethnicity) and lifestyle factors (i.e., history of smoking and drinking). Home address was categorized as “city”, “town”, or “county”. Ethnicity was classified as “Han” and “non-Han”. Family type was categorized as “two-parent” or “single-parent/no-parent”. Family socioeconomic status was classified as “good”, “moderate”, or “poor”. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated as weight divided by height squared.
Refractive error (sphere, cylinder, and axis) was measured using an autorefractor (Canon Inc. Ltd., Tochigiken, Japan) operated by optometrists or trained technicians. Myopia was recorded in increments of 0.25 Diopters. The first five valid readings were used and averaged using vector methods to give a single estimate of refractive error. All five readings were required to be at most 0.50 diopters (D) apart in both the spherical and cylinder components. The spherical equivalent (SE) was defined as the sphere plus half cylinder. Myopia was defined as an SE of less than -0.5 D in the current study ().
The PBI is a widely used self-report measure assessing perceived parenting styles during the first 16 years across three dimensions: parental care, autonomy encouragement, and control (, ). Both maternal (PBI-M) and paternal (PBI-F) versions were administered, each containing 23 items rated on a 4-point Likert scale (0 = “very inconsistent” to 3 = “very consistent”), with higher scores indicating stronger parental behaviors. We focused on its parental control subscale, which evaluates intrusive and overprotective parental behaviors that restrict a child’s independence and psychological autonomy. This subscale comprises 6 items (e.g., restricting activities, imposing excessive control). This subscale has demonstrated good reliability and validity in Chinese college freshmen (). Cronbach’s alpha for the control subscale was 0.536 (PBI-M) and 0.595 (PBI-F), which is acceptable given the limited number of items and the multi-dimensional nature of parental control.
A vision-related QoL scale was used to assess the QoL of college freshmen with myopia (). The 22-item scale comprises four subscales: Physical Function (interference with daily physiological activities due to visual defects), Emotional Function (emotional changes caused by vision defects), Vision Function and Bodily Performance (limitations in vision and physical function due to vision defects), and Social Activity (restrictions in social activities due to vision defects). Items are rated on a 5-point scale (1 = “always” to 5 = “never”), with higher scores indicating better QoL. Subscale score ranges are 6–30 for Physical Function, 9–45 for Emotional Function, 5–25 for Vision Function and Bodily Performance, and 2–10 for Social Activity; the total score ranges from 22-110.
The Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) is a 20-item self-report questionnaire assessing depressive symptoms over the preceding week (–). Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = “a little of the time” to 4 = “most of the time”), yielding a total score range of 20-80. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.857.
Data management and statistical analysis
Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) for continuous variables and as frequency or percentage for categorical variables. Characteristics of participants with myopia versus those without myopia were compared using Student’s t test or the chi-square test. Pearson’s bivariate correlation analysis was used to evaluate associations between study variables.
To determine whether vision-related QoL mediates the relationship between parental control and depressive symptoms, a mediation analysis was performed using PROCESS (version 3.5 by Andrew F. Hayes) with Model 4. The mediation models were adjusted for age, gender, BMI, ethnicity, alcohol use, smoking status, family socioeconomic status, home address, family type, and only-child status. Robustness was evaluated by calculating E values for the total effect to quantify the potential impact of unmeasured confounders (, ). Cohen’s f2 was calculated to describe the magnitude of the association between parental control and depressive symptoms (). The significance of the mediation effect was tested using 5,000 bootstrap resamples to construct a 95% confidence interval (CI). A mediating effect was considered significant if the 95% CI excluded zero. Statistical power for each pathway within the mediation model was estimated using the wp.mediation function (WebPower, R). Separate analyses were run for each vision-related QoL subscale: physical function, emotional function, vision function and bodily performance, and social activity, with α set at 0.05 (two-tailed). All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 25.0 and R version 4.3.1. Two-sided P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results
Among the 2,698 freshmen, 2,014 provided complete data, yielding an effective response rate of 74.6%. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the entire sample. Table 2 presents descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations among the main study variables, which provide the basis for the subsequent mediation analysis. Maternal and paternal control were positively associated with depressive symptoms in both groups (myopic: r = 0.31 and 0.33; non-myopic: r = 0.21 and 0.28, all P < 0.05). Among myopic participants, paternal control was negatively correlated with physical function (r = -0.11), emotional function (r = -0.21), visual function and body performance (r = -0.17), and social activity (r = -0.05). Maternal control was significantly correlated with physical function (r = -0.08), emotional function (r = -0.21) and visual function and body performance (r = -0.18) in myopic participants. Except for social activity, parental control was significantly related to all study variables in non-myopic participants (P < 0.05).
Table 1
| Characteristics | Students with myopia (n=1848) | Students without myopia (n=166) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender, n(%) | |||
| Male | 554 (87.00) | 83 (13.00) | < 0.001 |
| Female | 1294 (94.00) | 83 (6.00) | |
| Age (years) | 19.00 (0.93) | 18.99 (0.89) | 0.91 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 20.82 (3.37) | 20.60 (2.86) | 0.35 |
| Ethnicity | |||
| Han | 1391 (92.06) | 120 (7.94) | 0.40 |
| Non-Han | 457 (90.85) | 46 (9.15) | |
| Alcohol status, n(%) | |||
| Yes | 311 (87.11) | 46 (12.89) | < 0.001 |
| No | 1537 (92.76) | 120 (7.24) | |
| Smoke status, n(%) | |||
| Yes | 118 (82.52) | 25 (17.48) | < 0.001 |
| No | 1730 (92.46) | 141 (7.54) | |
| Family condition | |||
| Good | 751 (91.47) | 70 (8.53) | 0.34 |
| Moderate | 1043 (92.22) | 88 (7.78) | |
| Poor | 54 (87.10) | 8 (12.90) | |
| Home address | |||
| City | 275 (90.46) | 29 (9.54) | 0.29 |
| Town | 364 (93.57) | 25 (6.43) | |
| County | 1209 (91.52) | 112 (8.48) | |
| Family type | |||
| Two-parent | 1659 (91.86) | 147 (8.14) | 0.62 |
| Single-parent or no-parent | 189 (90.87) | 19 (9.13) | |
| Only child | |||
| Yes | 315 (88.73) | 40 (11.27) | 0.02 |
| No | 1533 (92.41) | 126 (7.59) | |
| Depressive symptoms | |||
| Yes | 913 (82.18) | 99 (17.82) | 0.01 |
| No | 935 (93.31) | 67 (6.69) | |
| Maternal control | 6.32 (2.76) | 6.84 (2.82) | 0.02 |
| Paternal control | 6.15 (2.92) | 6.65 (3.07) | 0.03 |
Sociodemographic and measures characteristics.
Table 2
| Mean | SD | 1. | 2. | 3. | 4. | 5. | 6. | 7. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Myopia | |||||||||
| 1. Depressive symptoms | 41.26 | 8.45 | 1.00 | ||||||
| 2. Physical function | 20.13 | 4.62 | -0.11*** | 1.00 | |||||
| 3. Emotional function | 34.75 | 5.68 | -0.26*** | 0.61*** | 1.00 | ||||
| 4. Vision function and body performance | 20.43 | 4.24 | -0.21*** | 0.50*** | 0.68*** | 1.00 | |||
| 5. Social activity | 5.76 | 2.60 | -0.23*** | -0.18*** | -0.11*** | -0.13*** | 1.00 | ||
| 6. Maternal control | 6.32 | 2.76 | 0.31*** | -0.08*** | -0.21*** | -0.18*** | 0.01 | 1.00 | |
| 7. Paternal control | 6.15 | 2.92 | 0.33*** | -0.11*** | -0.21*** | -0.17*** | -0.05* | 0.62*** | 1.00 |
| Without myopia | |||||||||
| 1. Depressive symptoms | 42.55 | 8.41 | 1.00 | ||||||
| 2. Physical function | 24.30 | 4.81 | -0.14 | 1.00 | |||||
| 3. Emotional function | 39.61 | 5.71 | -0.31*** | 0.65*** | 1.00 | ||||
| 4. Vision function and body performance | 23.21 | 3.38 | -0.25*** | 0.67*** | 0.87*** | 1.00 | |||
| 5. Social activity | 5.75 | 3.38 | -0.31*** | -0.18* | 0.10 | -0.03 | 1.00 | ||
| 6. Maternal control | 6.84 | 2.82 | 0.21* | -0.19* | -0.20* | -0.20* | -0.10 | 1.00 | |
| 7. Paternal control | 6.65 | 3.07 | 0.28*** | -0.20* | -0.24* | -0.23* | -0.06 | 0.64*** | 1.00 |
Descriptive statistics of and linear correlations among the study variables (n = 2014).
*P <.05; ***P <.001.
Mediation analysis was conducted to examine whether vision-related QoL mediated the association between parental control and depressive symptoms. As shown in Table 3, vision-related QoL significantly mediated these associations. The mediating effect of maternal and paternal control was 0.15 (15.69%) and 0.18 (18.86%), respectively. Standard indirect effects of maternal and paternal control on depressive symptoms were reported in Table 3 (maternal: 0.05 ± 0.01; paternal: 0.06 ± 0.01). Without vision-related QoL, the total effects of maternal (β = 0.93, P <.001) and paternal (β = 0.94, P <.001) control on depressive symptoms were significant. Cohen’s f² values for the total-effect model were 0.13 (maternal control) and 0.15 (paternal control), the latter meeting and the former approximating the conventional medium-effect threshold of 0.15, indicating a moderate effect size between parental control and depressive symptoms. The E values for the associations between maternal control, paternal control, and depressive symptoms were all 1.45 (Supplementary Figure 1). An E-value of 1.45 indicates that an unmeasured confounder would need to be associated with both parental control and depressive symptoms by a risk ratio of at least 1.45 to fully explain away the observed association, which is considered moderately strong, increasing confidence in the results. However, no such confounder was observed in our study. Therefore, we proposed that any omitted confounder was unlikely to explain the observed findings, attesting to the robustness of the results.
Table 3
| Model effect | Effect size | SE | 95% CI | Proportion of effect | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCI | UCI | ||||
| Maternal control | |||||
| Total effect | 0.93 | 0.07 | 0.79 | 1.06 | 100.00% |
| Direct effect | 0.78 | 0.07 | 0.65 | 0.91 | 84.31% |
| Indirect effect | 0.15 | 0.03 | 0.09 | 0.20 | 15.69% |
| Model 1 | -0.01 | 0.01 | -0.03 | 0.01 | |
| Model 2 | 0.14 | 0.03 | 0.09 | 0.19 | |
| Model 3 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.002 | 0.07 | |
| Model 4 | -0.02 | 0.02 | -0.05 | 0.02 | |
| Standard indirect effect | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.07 | |
| Model 1 | -0.003 | 0.003 | -0.01 | 0.002 | |
| Model 2 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.06 | |
| Model 3 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.001 | 0.02 | |
| Model 4 | -0.01 | 0.01 | -0.02 | 0.01 | |
| Paternal control | |||||
| Total effect | 0.94 | 0.06 | 0.81 | 1.06 | 100.00% |
| Direct effect | 0.76 | 0.06 | 0.64 | 0.88 | 81.14% |
| Indirect effect | 0.18 | 0.03 | 0.13 | 0.23 | 18.86% |
| Model 1 | -0.02 | 0.01 | -0.04 | 0.01 | |
| Model 2 | 0.13 | 0.03 | 0.08 | 0.18 | |
| Model 3 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.07 | |
| Model 4 | 0.03 | 0.02 | -0.002 | 0.06 | |
| Standard indirect effect | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.08 | |
| Model 1 | -0.01 | 0.004 | -0.01 | 0.002 | |
| Model 2 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.06 | |
| Model 3 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.002 | 0.02 | |
| Model 4 | 0.01 | 0.01 | -0.001 | 0.02 | |
The mediating effect of vision-related quality of life with depressive symptoms as the dependent variable (n = 1848).
Models 1 to 4 represent the mediating pathways mediated by Physical Function, Emotional Function, Vision Function and Body Performance, and Social Activity, respectively. Bold font indicates a significant model.
Figure 1 shows that higher levels of maternal control were associated with poorer physical function (β = -0.16, P <.001), emotional function (β = -0.44, P <.001), and vision function and body performance (β = -0.28, P <.001). Emotional function (β = -0.30, P <.001) and vision function and body performance (β = -0.13, P = .03) significantly associated with depressive symptoms. Similarly, Figure 2 indicates that higher paternal control was linked to lower scores on physical function (β = -0.20, P <.001), emotional function (β = -0.42, P <.001), and vision function and body performance (β = -0.25, P <.001). Emotional function (β = -0.31, P <.001) and vision function and body performance (β = -0.14, P = .02) significantly linked to depressive symptoms.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Table 4 suggests the results of the bootstrap test for mediation effects based on 5,000 resamples, which are consistent with the previously specified mediation models. In the association between maternal control and depressive symptoms, the indirect effect via emotional function was significant (β = -0.44, 95% CI = -0.56 to -0.34), as was the indirect effect via vision function and bodily performance (β = -0.28, 95% CI = -0.36 to -0.21). Physical function and social activity achieved statistical significance only along isolated segments, thereby failing to establish a complete mediation chain. Parallel findings were observed for paternal control, with emotional function (β = -0.42, 95% CI = -0.53 to -0.32) and vision function and bodily performance (β = -0.25, 95% CI = -0.32 to -0.17) emerging as robust mediators, whereas physical functioning and social activity remained significant solely in single segments. The post-hoc power analysis indicated that the pathway via emotional function achieved near-maximal power (power > 0.99). The pathway through vision function and bodily performance reached a moderate level (power = 0.61), whereas the pathways via physical function (power = 0.232) and social activity (power = 0.276) exhibited comparatively low power.
Table 4
| Mediation models | Effect size | Boot mean | Boot SE | Bootstrap 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boot LCI | Boot UCI | ||||
| Model 1 | |||||
| Maternal Control→ | |||||
| Physical Function | -0.16 | -0.17 | 0.05 | -0.25 | -0.08 |
| Emotional Function | -0.44 | -0.45 | 0.06 | -0.56 | -0.34 |
| Vision Function and Body Performance | -0.28 | -0.28 | 0.04 | -0.36 | -0.21 |
| Social Activity | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | -0.02 | 0.07 |
| Depressive Symptoms | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.07 | 0.65 | 0.91 |
| Depressive Symptoms← | |||||
| Physical Function | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | -0.05 | 0.14 |
| Emotional Function | -0.30 | -0.30 | 0.05 | -0.40 | -0.21 |
| Vision Function and Body Performance | -0.13 | -0.13 | 0.06 | -0.24 | -0.01 |
| Social Activity | -0.81 | -0.81 | 0.07 | -0.95 | -0.66 |
| Model 2 | |||||
| Paternal Control→ | |||||
| Physical Function | -0.20 | -0.20 | 0.04 | -0.29 | -0.11 |
| Emotional Function | -0.42 | -0.42 | 0.05 | -0.53 | -0.32 |
| Vision Function and Body Performance | -0.25 | -0.25 | 0.04 | -0.32 | -0.17 |
| Social Activity | -0.04 | -0.04 | 0.02 | -0.08 | 0.002 |
| Depressive Symptoms | 0.76 | 0.76 | 0.06 | 0.64 | 0.88 |
| Depressive Symptoms← | |||||
| Physical Function | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.05 | -0.03 | 0.18 |
| Emotional Function | -0.31 | -0.31 | 0.05 | -0.40 | -0.21 |
| Vision Function and Body Performance | -0.14 | -0.14 | 0.06 | -0.25 | -0.02 |
| Social Activity | -0.75 | -0.75 | 0.07 | -0.89 | -0.60 |
Results of bootstrap test for mediating effects (5000 resamples).
Bold font indicates a significant model.
We compared myopic and non-myopic participants (Table 1). No significant differences were observed between participants with and without myopia in terms of age, ethnicity, BMI, family condition, home address, or family type (P > 0.05). Female participants, non-alcohol consumers, non-smokers, and non-only-children had a significantly higher prevalence of myopia compared to their male counterparts, alcohol consumers, smokers, and only-children, respectively (P < 0.05). Additionally, participants with myopia reported lower levels of both maternal (P = 0.02) and paternal control (P = 0.03). Myopic participants also reported significantly lower SDS scores (41.26 ± 8.45) than non-myopic peers (42.55 ± 8.41) (Table 2).
Discussion
This study found that vision-related QoL mediates the relationship between parental control and depressive symptoms in myopic college freshmen. Interestingly, and contrary to some previous literature, our sample showed that myopic students had a lower risk of depressive symptoms compared to their non-myopic peers.
In contrast to the previous studies, the present study found that students with myopia exhibited a lower risk of depressive symptoms. While previous studies have reported associations between visual impairment and negative psychosocial outcomes (, ), few investigations align with our findings. A community-based survey reported positive associations between myopia and depressive symptoms among older adults (), whereas other studies found no significant association. For example, a school-based study detected no difference in depression rates between myopic and non-myopic students (), and research during the COVID-19 pandemic reported no association among Chinese university freshmen (). This apparent inconsistency can be explained through several mechanisms. First, sampling heterogeneity may account for the discrepancy. Myopia is commonly associated with higher educational attainment and superior academic performance. Although high-achieving students are not immune to distress, converging evidence indicates that greater educational attainment predicts a lower long-term risk of depression, while robust academic self-efficacy has been shown to protect against depressive symptoms (). Second, a potential “parental-attention buffering effect” may operate. Myopia onset and progression are frequently accompanied by intensified parental investment, potentially increasing parent-child interaction and emotional support. Consistent with the stress-buffering model, such support could create a psychological cushion against academic stress and other adversities (). In line with this interpretation, myopic students reported significantly higher parental-care scores than their non-myopic peers (mother: 23.21 ± 4.98 vs. 21.96 ± 5.36, P = 0.004; father: 20.92 ± 4.29 vs. 19.77 ± 4.75, P = 0.001). For first-year undergraduates navigating the transition from family to university, such support is a critical mental-health resource. Third, myopia is typically accompanied by intensive study engagement, and academic achievement itself has been linked to antidepressant factors, including elevated self-esteem, future orientation, and problem-solving capacity ().
Our analysis further revealed that parental control may contribute to the risk of depressive symptoms through its association with reduced vision-related QoL across emotional function, vision function and body performance. Parents who exert excessive control, possibly motivated by academic anxiety, may encourage their children to engage in prolonged near-work and limit outdoor activities, a pattern that has been empirically associated with accelerated myopia progression (, ). As myopia progresses, adolescents may experience increasing limitations in sports participation, object recognition, and social interaction, potentially leading to a decline in QoL. Previous studies have consistently demonstrated that reduced vision-related QoL is significantly associated with elevated anxiety and depressive symptoms (, ). Vision impairment itself might not be the sole determinant, rather, the cascade of secondary declines in QoL, such as academic difficulties, activity restrictions, and apprehensions about future development, may constitute a critical pathway to depressive symptoms (). Further evidence indicates that adolescents exposed to greater parental psychological control appear more susceptible to emotion-regulation deficits, diminished self-efficacy, and internalizing problems (, ). In other words, overcontrol might not only exacerbate global negative affect but also directly impair the “emotional function” dimension of vision-related QoL. Frustration, anxiety, and irritability resulting from visual impairment could be intensified by parental reproach and intrusive intervention. Such intrusive behaviors may compromise emotional autonomy, impede adaptive emotion regulation, and culminate in the accumulation of negative affect, thereby increasing the risk of depression (, ).
Several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the sample comprised predominantly college freshmen, which limits generalizability to other age or educational groups. Second, the sample was drawn from a single university. While this homogeneity strengthens internal validity for this specific population, it inherently constrains the generalizability of the findings to diverse age cohorts, educational tiers, or students from institutions with varying academic profiles or geographic contexts. Furthermore, data collection occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, a period of heightened psychological stress globally (, ). The depressive symptoms we observed may therefore reflect this unique context, limiting the generalizability of the absolute prevalence of symptoms to non-pandemic periods. Therefore, extrapolating these results to broader populations or drawing nationwide inferences requires caution, the current findings are most relevant for understanding trends in populations exposed to intense academic demands and comparable myopia prevalence. Third, although we retrospectively assessed parenting styles and contemporaneously measured vision-related QoL and mental-health status, the cross-sectional design precludes the establishment of causal relationships. For instance, it remains unclear whether parental control precedes declines in vision-related QoL or whether pre-existing mental-health issues elicit stricter parental supervision. Without longitudinal tracking to document the order of variable emergence and to disentangle potential bidirectional influences, assertions about causal directions remain speculative. Thus, longitudinal data with repeated measurements are needed to clarify these relationships. Finally, parental control, vision-related QoL, and depressive symptoms were self-reported via questionnaires, rendering the data susceptible to bias. Specifically, recall bias may have distorted retrospective reports of parental control, as participants might inaccurately reconstruct past experiences. Furthermore, social-desirability bias could have influenced participants’ responses: they might have underreported parental control to align with societal norms regarding autonomous college life or downplayed depressive symptoms to avoid stigma.
Conclusion
In this cross-sectional study of college freshmen in Yunnan Province, China, we found that vision-related QoL significantly mediated the association between parental control and depressive symptoms, suggesting a potential mechanism for depressive symptoms in myopic adolescents. These findings underscore the importance of cultivating a supportive family environment and highlight the value of promoting autonomy-supportive parenting as part of myopia management programs to bolster adolescent mental health. Future longitudinal research is needed to confirm these causal pathways and to develop family-based interventions that can improve both visual and psychological outcomes for adolescents with myopia.
Statements
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
Ethics committee approval was obtained from the Affiliated Hospital of Yunnan University (Number 2021040). The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
GL: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization. XD: Visualization, Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. DL: Writing – review & editing. ML: Writing – review & editing. ZY: Writing – review & editing. YL: Writing – review & editing. TZ: Writing – original draft, Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis. CP: Conceptualization, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 82160204 and 31800907) and the Philosophy and Social Science Foundation of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (Grant No. 2022SJYB1454).
Acknowledgments
We frankly thank all participants and the schools involved in the survey, as well as other staff members on the scene.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1642896/full#supplementary-material
References
1
PanCWDiraniMChengCYWongTYSawSM. The age-specific prevalence of myopia in Asia: a meta-analysis. Optom Vis Sci. (2015) 92:258–66. doi: 10.1097/opx.0000000000000516
2
SunJZhouJZhaoPLianJZhuHZhouYet al. High prevalence of myopia and high myopia in 5060 Chinese university students in Shanghai. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. (2012) 53:7504–9. doi: 10.1167/iovs.11-8343
3
ZhangHMLiBQZhuYLiuSXWeiRH. Time trends in myopia and high myopia prevalence in young university adults in China. Int J Ophthalmol. (2023) 16:1676–81. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2023.10.18
4
WangTJChiangTHWangTHLinLLShihYF. Changes of the ocular refraction among freshmen in National Taiwan University between 1988 and 2005. Eye (Lond). (2009) 23:1168–9. doi: 10.1038/eye.2008.184
5
ModjtahediBSFerrisFL3rdHunterDGFongDS. Public health burden and potential interventions for myopia. Ophthalmology. (2018) 125:628–30. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.01.033
6
LargeM. Study on suicide risk assessment in mental illness underestimates inpatient suicide risk. Bmj. (2016) 532:i267. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i267
7
WangJWuXLaiWLongEZhangXLiWet al. Prevalence of depression and depressive symptoms among outpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. (2017) 7:e017173. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017173
8
MalhiGSMannJJ. Depression. Lancet. (2018) 392:2299–312. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)31948-2
9
MagiatiIPonniahKOoiYPChanYHFungDWooB. Self-reported depression and anxiety symptoms in school-aged Singaporean children. Asia Pac Psychiatry. (2015) 7:91–104. doi: 10.1111/appy.12099
10
YoungKSSandmanCFCraskeMG. Positive and negative emotion regulation in adolescence: links to anxiety and depression. Brain Sci. (2019) 9:76. doi: 10.3390/brainsci9040076
11
ŁazarczykJBUrbanBKonarzewskaBSzulcABakunowicz-ŁazarczykAŻmudzkaEet al. The differences in level of trait anxiety among girls and boys aged 13–17 years with myopia and emmetropia. BMC Ophthalmol. (2016) 16:201. doi: 10.1186/s12886-016-0382-2
12
LiDChanVFVirgiliGPiyasenaPNegashHWhitestoneNet al. Impact of vision impairment and ocular morbidity and their treatment on depression and anxiety in children: A systematic review. Ophthalmology. (2022) 129:1152–70. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2022.05.020
13
LiQYangJHeYWangTZhongLZhuZet al. Investigation of the psychological health of first-year high school students with myopia in Guangzhou. Brain Behav. (2020) 10:e01594. doi: 10.1002/brb3.1594
14
ZhangHGaoHZhuYZhuYDangWWeiRet al. Relationship between myopia and other risk factors with anxiety and depression among chinese university freshmen during the COVID-19 pandemic. Front Public Health. (2021) 9:774237. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.774237
15
LiMWangWZhuBTanX. A latent class analysis of student eye care behavior: evidence from a sample of 6–17 years old in China. Front Public Health. (2022) 10:914592. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.914592
16
DuZWangSBullochGZhangFWangYLaiCet al. Accelerometer-measured daily behaviors that mediate the association between refractive status and depressive disorders. Transl Vis Sci Technol. (2024) 13:3. doi: 10.1167/tvst.13.7.3
17
GuoLYSunHHuMJiangYHLuoZH. Mental health status of parents of young patients with high myopia. J Int Med Res. (2020) 48:300060519873474. doi: 10.1177/0300060519873474
18
ZhouSYangLLuBWangHXuTDuDet al. Association between parents’ attitudes and behaviors toward children’s visual care and myopia risk in school-aged children. Med (Baltimore). (2017) 96:e9270. doi: 10.1097/md.0000000000009270
19
SanaviFSBaghbanianAShoveyMFAnsari-MoghaddamA. A study on family communication pattern and parenting styles with quality of life in adolescent. J Pak Med Assoc. (2013) 63:1393–8.
20
XuFXingHYuWChenSLiH. Health-related quality of life and influencing factors among migrant children in Shaoxing, China. Health Qual Life Outcomes. (2017) 15:100. doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0679-8
21
WangCShiHLiG. Helicopter parenting and college student depression: the mediating effect of physical self-esteem. Front Psychiatry. (2023) 14:1329248. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1329248
22
WangCLuoYLiHZhangG. The relationship between parental support for exercise and depression: The mediating effects of physical exercise and physical self-esteem. PloS One. (2024) 19:e0304977. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304977
23
BarberBK. Parental psychological control: revisiting a neglected construct. Child Dev. (1996) 67:3296–319. doi: 10.2307/1131780
24
WuYMaQSunHPXuYNiuMEPanCW. Myopia and depressive symptoms among older Chinese adults. PloS One. (2017) 12:e0177613. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177613
25
GongXNiZWuB. The mediating roles of functional limitations and social support on the relationship between vision impairment and depressive symptoms in older adults. Ageing Soc. (2020) 40:465–79. doi: 10.1017/S0144686X18001010
26
ZhangJZhengSHuZ. The effect of physical exercise on depression in college students: the chain mediating role of self-concept and social support. Front Psychol. (2022) 13:841160. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.841160
27
FrancisAPaiMSBadagabettuS. Psychological well-being and perceived parenting style among adolescents. Compr Child Adolesc Nurs. (2021) 44:134–43. doi: 10.1080/24694193.2020.1743796
28
CongEZCaiYYWangYWuY. Association of depression and suicidal ideation with parenting style in adolescents. Zhongguo Dang Dai Er Ke Za Zhi. (2021) 23:938–43. doi: 10.7499/j.issn.1008-8830.2105124
29
AngJKPhangCKMukhtarFOsmanZJAwangHSidikSMet al. Association between perceived parental style and depressive symptoms among adolescents in Hulu Langat District, Malaysia. Int J Adolesc Med Health. (2017) 30:20160130. doi: 10.1515/ijamh-2016-0130
30
CaoWGuoCPingWTanZGuoYZhengJ. A community-based study of quality of life and depression among older adults. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2016) 13:693. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13070693
31
ChangYCOuyangWCLuMCWangJDHuSC. Levels of depressive symptoms may modify the relationship between the WHOQOL-BREF and its determining factors in community-dwelling older adults. Int Psychogeriatr. (2016) 28:591–601. doi: 10.1017/s1041610215002276
32
HelvikASCorazziniKSelbækGBjørkløfGHLaksJŠaltytė BenthJet al. Health-related quality of life in older depressed psychogeriatric patients: one year follow-up. BMC Geriatr. (2016) 16:131. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0310-6
33
D’ZurillaTJSheedyCF. Relation between social problem-solving ability and subsequent level of psychological stress in college students. J Pers Soc Psychol. (1991) 61:841–6. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.61.5.841
34
RamjitN. Stress as a cultural tool in higher education. CUNY Graduate Center. (2017). Available online at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1899 (Accessed February 16, 2025).
35
LevensSMElrahalFSaguiSJ. The role of family support and perceived stress reactivity in predicting depression in college freshman. J Soc Clin Psychol. (2016) 35:342–55. doi: 10.1521/jscp.2016.35.4.342
36
ParkerGTuplingHBrownLB. A parental bonding instrument. Br J Med Psychol. (1979) 52:1–10. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8341.1979.tb02487.x
37
YangHJZhouSJChuYMLiLLiuQ. The revision of parental bonding instrument for chinese college students. Chin J Clin Psychol. (2009) 17:434–36.
38
FeiWGengYWangSMaQPengXZhangMet al. Association between parental control and subclinical depressive symptoms in a sample of college freshmen: Roles of empathy and gender. J Affect Disord. (2021) 286:301–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.03.005
39
KeF. Develop a quality of life (QOL) scale about vision for primary and middle school students and analysis of influence factors of QOL. (master’s thesis). (2008). Hubei: Huazhong University of Science and Technology. doi: 10.7666/d.d065335
40
LiYDaiWZhangJ. Anxiety, depression and quality of life in patients with a treated or untreated unruptured intracranial aneurysm. J Clin Neurosci. (2017) 45:223–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.07.019
41
LiuTJiaCPengYFZhongWFangX. Correlation between premature ejaculation and psychological disorders in 270 Chinese outpatients. Psychiatry Res. (2019) 272:69–72. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2018.12.038
42
XieYHXieHTWangTSShuYPDaiXL. Perioperative holistic care more significantly reduces levels of anxiety and depression of pituitary tumor patients versus conventional care. Med (Baltimore). (2019) 98:e14411. doi: 10.1097/md.0000000000014411
43
MathurMBDingPRiddellCAVanderWeeleTJ. Web site and R package for computing E-values. Epidemiology. (2018) 29:e45–7. doi: 10.1097/ede.0000000000000864
44
VanderWeeleTJDingP. Sensitivity analysis in observational research: introducing the E-value. Ann Intern Med. (2017) 167:268–74. doi: 10.7326/m16-2607
45
CohenJ. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Cambridge: Academic Press (2013). p. 567.
46
BrunesAHeirT. Visual impairment and depression: Age-specific prevalence, associations with vision loss, and relation to life satisfaction. World J Psychiatry. (2020) 10:139–49. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v10.i6.139
47
GarciaGAKhoshnevisMGaleJFrousiakisSEHwangTJPoincenotLet al. Profound vision loss impairs psychological well-being in young and middle-aged individuals. Clin Ophthalmol. (2017) 11:417–27. doi: 10.2147/opth.S113414
48
Vinueza VelozMFBhattaLJonesPRTesliMSmithGDDaviesNMet al. Educational attainment and mental health conditions: a within-sibship Mendelian randomization study. medRxiv. (2024). doi: 10.1101/2024.08.10.24311789
49
CohenSWillsTA. Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol Bull. (1985) 98:310–57. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310
50
DefriesZGrotheL. High academic achievement in psychotic students. Am J Psychiatry. (1978) 135:217–9. doi: 10.1176/ajp.135.2.217
51
LiuYLJhangJPHsiaoCKTsaiTHWangIJ. Influence of parental behavior on myopigenic behaviors and risk of myopia: analysis of nationwide survey data in children aged 3 to 18 years. BMC Public Health. (2022) 22:1637. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14036-5
52
TaoZYChenSQTangYZhaoJWangJLinZHet al. The influence of parents’ Background and their perception on the progression of myopia in children. Int J Clin Pract. (2022) 2022:4123470. doi: 10.1155/2022/4123470
53
YeJLouLJinKXuYYeXMossTet al. Vision-related quality of life and appearance concerns are associated with anxiety and depression after eye enucleation: A cross-sectional study. PloS One. (2015) 10:e0136460. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136460
54
DuYMoXHLiXLZengJLuoWHuangML. Vision-related quality of life and depression in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment patients. Med (Baltimore). (2019) 98:e14225. doi: 10.1097/md.0000000000014225
55
KhadkaJFenwickELamoureuxEPesudovsK. Methods to develop the eye-tem bank to measure ophthalmic quality of life. Optom Vis Sci. (2016) 93:1485–94. doi: 10.1097/opx.0000000000000992
56
HaJJueJ. The mediating effect of emotion inhibition and emotion regulation between adolescents’ Perceived parental psychological control and depression. SAGE Open. (2018) 8:215824401879368. doi: 10.1177/2158244018793680
57
UllrichTB. The interplay between parental psychological control and parental emotional overinvolvement on depressive symptoms among early adolescents (master’s thesis). Chicago, IL: DePaul University, College of Science and Health. (2023). Available online at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/csh_etd/487 (Accessed March 14, 2025).
58
PettitGSLairdRDDodgeKABatesJECrissMM. Antecedents and behavior-problem outcomes of parental monitoring and psychological control in early adolescence. Child Dev. (2001) 72:583–98. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00298
59
BleysDSoenensBClaesSVliegenNLuytenP. Parental psychological control, adolescent self-criticism, and adolescent depressive symptoms: A latent change modeling approach in Belgian adolescents. J Clin Psychol. (2018) 74:1833–53. doi: 10.1002/jclp.22632
60
WangSZhangYDingWMengYHuHLiuZet al. Psychological distress and sleep problems when people are under interpersonal isolation during an epidemic: A nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study. Eur Psychiatry. (2020) 63:e77. doi: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2020.78
61
WangSZhangYGuanYDingWMengYHuHet al. A nationwide evaluation of the prevalence of and risk factors associated with anxiety, depression and insomnia symptoms during the return-to-work period of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. (2021) 56:2275–86. doi: 10.1007/s00127-021-02046-4
Summary
Keywords
depressive symptoms, parental control, quality of life, myopia, college freshmen
Citation
Liang G, Dong X-X, Li D-L, Liu M-X, Yin Z-J, Li Y-Z, Zhang T and Pan C-W (2025) Parental control and depressive symptoms in college freshmen with myopia: the mediating role of vision-related quality of life. Front. Psychiatry 16:1642896. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1642896
Received
20 June 2025
Revised
17 November 2025
Accepted
28 November 2025
Published
26 December 2025
Volume
16 - 2025
Edited by
Eduardo Fernández-Jiménez, European University of Madrid, Spain
Reviewed by
Ahmad Neyazi, Afghanistan Center for Epidemiological Studies, Afghanistan
Shu Wang, Capital Medical University, China
Updates
Copyright
© 2025 Liang, Dong, Li, Liu, Yin, Li, Zhang and Pan.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Tianyang Zhang, tyzhang@suda.edu.cn; Chen-Wei Pan, pcwonly@gmail.com
† These authors have contributed equally to this work
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.