Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of keratoconus: multi-centric study from India

Eye volume 40, pages 417–424 (2026)Cite this article

Subjects

This article has been updated

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to determine if the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients with keratoconus had changed in recent times.

Methods

This prospective multicentre study was conducted at four tertiary eye institutes in India between October 2022 and September 2023. Only patients newly diagnosed with keratoconus were included in the study.

Results

The mean age of the 421 patients was 23.5 ± 8.9 years, and there were 249 (59.1%) male and 170 (40.9%) female patients. The highest prevalence (44.89%) was observed between the ages of 20 and 29. Females were younger than males (P = 0.040). The onset of symptoms preceded the diagnosis by 2.7 ± 4.3 years. A total of 298 patients (70.8%) were from the urban areas. The majority of patients (79.1%) belonged to the middle socioeconomic class (P < 0.001), and 251 (59.6%) had obtained a graduate or higher degree (P < 0.001). The most common sign in mild keratoconus was scissors reflex. Binocular vision impairment was absent in 259 patients (61.5%), whereas the rest had some degree of impairment. Keratoconus was asymmetrical in 36.1% of the patients. Clinical signs were absent in 5% of the patients.

Conclusion

Despite advances in corneal imaging and awareness about keratoconus, patients were still being diagnosed in the third decade of life. The presence of scissors reflex in patients coming for refraction should alert eyecare professionals to the presence of keratoconus, and corneal tomography should be advised in these patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 22 January 2026

    At the First page, right hand column, second paragraph, Line no. 5 from the top of the paragraph, a date appears as 31.9.2023. It should read 30.9.2023 this has been corrected.

References

  1. Singh RB, Parmar UPS, Jhanjhi V. Prevalence and economic burden of keratoconus in the United States. Am J Ophthalmol. 2024;259:71–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kapur N, Chatterjee S, Gomase SN, Khurana A, Parmar G, Sangwan VS. Preferred practice patterns for keratoconus: an e-survey among Indian cornea specialists. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2024;72:111–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Deshmukh RS, Das AV, Vaddavalli PK. Evolving trends in the diagnosis and management of keratoconus over 3 decades. Cornea. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000003635.

  4. Sharma N, Rao K, Maharana PK, Vajpayee RB. Ocular allergy and keratoconus. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2013;61:407–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Al-Amri AM. Prevalence of keratoconus in a refractive surgery population. J Ophthalmol. 2018;2018:5983530.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Shilpy N, Shah Z, Singh S, Purohit D. Prevalence of keratoconus in refractive surgery cases in western India. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol. 2020;27:156–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Das AV, Deshmukh RS, Reddy JC, Joshi VP, Singh VM, Gogri PY, et al. Keratoconus in India: clinical presentation and demographic distribution based on big data analytics. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2024;72:105–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shah Z, Purohit D, Danayak P. Keratoconus characteristics and associations: a cross-sectional keratoconus study in western India. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2024;72:704–11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Sood I, Sabherwal S, Mathur U, Jain E, Bhadauria M, Agrawal D, et al. Harnessing generalizable real-world ophthalmic big data: descriptive analysis of the Bodhya Eye Consortium model for collaborative research. Online J Public Health Inform. 2024;16:e53370.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Zadnik K, Barr JT, Edrington TB, Everett DF, Jameson M, McMahon TT, et al. Baseline findings in the collaborative longitudinal evaluation of keratoconus (CLEK) study. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:2537–46.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Saleem SM, Jan SS. Modified Kuppuswamy socioeconomic scale updated for the year 2021. Indian J Forensic Community Med. 2021;8:1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kennedy RH, Bourne WM, Dyer JA. A 48-year clinical and epidemiologic study of keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 1986;101:267–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Saini JS, Saroha V, Singh P, Sukhija JS, Jain AK. Keratoconus in Asian eyes at a tertiary eye care facility. Clin Exp Optom. 2004;87:97–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Weed KH, MacEwen CJ, Giles T, Low J, McGhee CN. The Dundee University Scottish Keratoconus study: demographics, corneal signs, associated diseases, and eye rubbing. Eye. 2008;22:534–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Agrawal VB. Characteristics of keratoconus patients at a tertiary eye center in India. J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2011;6:87–91.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Khor WB, Wei RH, Lim L, Chan CM, Tan DT. Keratoconus in Asians: demographics, clinical characteristics and visual function in a hospital-based population. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011;39:299–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hwang S, Lim DH, Chung TY. Prevalence and incidence of keratoconus in South Korea: a nationwide population-based study.Am J Ophthalmol.2018;192:56–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Naderan M, Jahanrad A, Farjadnia M. Clinical biomicroscopy and retinoscopy findings of keratoconus in a Middle Eastern population. Clin Exp Optom. 2018;101:46–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lin KK, Lee JS, Hou CH, Chen WM, Hsiao CH, Chen YW. The sociodemographic and risk factors for keratoconus: nationwide matched case-control study in Taiwan, 1998–2015. Am J Ophthalmol. 2021;223:140–8.

  20. Yang K, Xu L, Fan Q, Gu Y, Zhang B, Meng F, et al. A hospital-based study on clinical data, demographic data and visual function of keratoconus patients in Central China. Sci Rep. 2021;11:7559.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Krachmer JH, Feder RS, Belin MW. Keratoconus and related noninflammatory corneal thinning disorders. Surv Ophthalmol. 1984;28:293–322.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rabinowitz YS. Keratoconus. Surv Ophthalmol. 1998;42:297–319.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tharini B, Sahebjada S, Borrone MA, Vaddavalli P, Ali H, Reddy JC. Keratoconus in pre-teen children: demographics and clinical profile. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022;70:3508–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Fink BA, Sinnott LT, Wagner H, Friedman C, Zadnik K. CLEK Study Group. The influence of gender and hormone status on the severity and progression of keratoconus. Cornea. 2010;29:65–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Al-Dairi W, Al Sowayigh OM, Al Saeed AA, Alsaad A. Depression among keratoconus patients in Saudi Arabia. Cureus. 2020;12:e11932.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Goebels S, Käsmann-Kellner B, Eppig T, Seitz B, Langenbucher A. Can retinoscopy keep up in keratoconus diagnosis?Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2015;38:234–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Al-Mahrouqi H, Oraba SB, Al-Habsi S, Mundemkattil N, Babu J, Panchatcharam SM, et al. Retinoscopy as a screening tool for keratoconus. Cornea. 2019;38:442–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ahmad TR, Kong AW, Turner ML, Barnett J, Kaur G, O’Brien KS, et al. Socioeconomic correlates of keratoconus severity and progression. Cornea. 2023;42:60–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Crawford AZ, McKelvie J, Craig JP, McGhee CN, Patel DV. Corneal transplantation in Auckland, New Zealand, 1999-2009: indications, patient characteristics, ethnicity, social deprivation, and access to services. Cornea. 2017;36:546–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Deepshikha Agrawal, MGM Eye Institute, Dr. Umang Mathur, Dr. Shroff’s Charity Eye Hospital, New Delhi, India, Dr. Vikas Mittal, LJ Eye Institute, Ambala, Haryana, India, for their contribution to mentoring the study. The authors would also like to express their deep gratitude and appreciation to Mr. Atanu Majumdar, M. Stat. and Ms. Priyanka Poddar for the statistical analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cornea and Anterior Segment, MGM Eye Institute, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India

    Samrat Chatterjee

  2. Department of Cornea and Anterior Segment, Dr Shroff’s Charity Eye Hospital, New Delhi, India

    Neha Kapur & Virender Singh Sangwan

  3. Department of Cornea and Refractive Surgery, Sadguru Netra Chikitsalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India

    Sanil Sawant

  4. Department of Cornea and Anterior Segment, LJ Eye Institute, Ambala, Haryana, India

    Neha Jain

Authors
  1. Samrat Chatterjee
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neha Kapur
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sanil Sawant
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Neha Jain
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Virender Singh Sangwan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SC was responsible for conceptualisation, designing, and writing the protocol, data collection, analysing data, interpreting results, and writing the manuscript. NK was responsible for creating the online data submission form. NK, SS, and NJ were responsible for data collection, interpreting results, reviewing and editing the final manuscript. VSS was responsible for supervising the study, reviewing the manuscript and providing feedback on the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samrat Chatterjee.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chatterjee, S., Kapur, N., Sawant, S. et al. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of keratoconus: multi-centric study from India. Eye 40, 417–424 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-025-04162-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-025-04162-w

Search

Advanced search

Quick links