Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36574139›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2023

Effect of Myopic Undercorrection on Habitual Reading Distance in Schoolchildren: The Hong Kong Children Eye Study.

Shu Min Tang, Xiu Juan Zhang, Yu Meng Wang, Yuzhou Zhang, Lok Man Wong, Hei-Nga Chan, Bi Ning Zhang, Wai Kit Chu, Ka Wai Kam, Alvin L Young and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Shu Min Tang *Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Xiu Juan Zhang *Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Yu Meng WangDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Yuzhou ZhangDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Lok Man WongDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Hei-Nga ChanDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Bi Ning ZhangDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Wai Kit ChuDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Ka Wai KamDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Alvin L YoungDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Clement C ThamDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Li Jia ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Amanda N FrenchDiscipline of Orthoptics, Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Kathryn A RoseDiscipline of Orthoptics, Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Chi Pui PangDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China. cppang@cuhk.edu.hk.
Jason C YamDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China. yamcheuksing@cuhk.edu.hk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2156-1486
Chinese University of Hong Kong · HKUniversity of Technology Sydney · AUFujian Medical University · CNHong Kong Baptist University · HK

Funding

Chinese University of Hong Kong 4054121Chinese University of Hong Kong 4054193Chinese University of Hong Kong 4054199Chinese University of Hong Kong 4054634Health and Medical Research Fund 07180826Health and Medical Research Fund 5160836Innovation and Technology Fund PRP/042/19FXUBS Optimus Foundation 8984University Grants Committee 14103419University Grants Committee 14111515University Grants Committee C7149-20G
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis study aimed to evaluate the habitual reading distance among non-myopic children and also myopic children with undercorrection and with full correction.

methodsThis was a population-based cross-sectional study with a total of 2363 children aged 6-8 years who were recruited from the Hong Kong Children Eye Study. Cycloplegic autorefraction, subjective refraction, habitual visual acuity, and best corrected visual acuity were measured. The entire reading process (9 min) was recorded using a hidden video camera placed 5 m away from the reading desk. Reading distances were taken at 6, 7, 8, and 9 min after the child began reading and were measured using a customized computer program developed in MATLAB. The main outcome was the association of habitual reading distances with refraction status. Habitual reading distances of children were documented via video camera footage.

resultsThe habitual reading distances of undercorrected myopic children (23.37 ± 4.31 cm) were the shortest when compared to non-myopic children (24.20 ± 4.73 cm, P = 0.002) and fully corrected myopic children (24.81 ± 5.21 cm, P < 0.001), while there was no significant difference between the last two children groups (P = 0.17). A shorter reading distance was associated with myopia (OR 1.67; 95% CI 1.11-2.51; P = 0.013) after adjusting for age, sex, height, near work time, outdoor time, and parental myopia. The association of reading distance with myopia did not hold after undercorrected myopic children were excluded (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.55-1.73; P = 0.92). A shorter reading distance correlated with poorer vision under habitual correction (β = - 0.003, P < 0.001).

conclusionA shorter reading distance was present among undercorrected myopic children. Myopia undercorrection is not recommended as a strategy for slowing myopic progression.

Indexed as

MyopiaReading distanceUndercorrection of myopia

Identifiers

PMID36574139
PMCPMC10011230
OpenAlexW4312210011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.