ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Peripheral Refraction of Two Myopia Control Contact Lens Models in a Young Myopic Population.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Childhood Myopia Part II: Treatment Mechanisms, Emerging Options, and Considerations.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Review
- Peripheral Defocus in Orthokeratology Myopia Correction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peripheral refraction can lead to the development of myopia. The aim of this study was to compare relative peripheral refraction (RPR) in the same cohort of uncorrected (WCL) and corrected eyes with two different soft contact lenses (CL) designed for myopia control, and to analyze RPR depending on the patient’s refraction. A total of 228 myopic eyes (114 healthy adult subjects) (−0.25 D to −10.00 D) were included. Open-field autorefraction was used to measure on- and off- axis refractions when uncorrected and corrected with the two CLs (dual focus (DF) and extended depth of focus (EDOF)). The RPR was measured every 10° out to 30° in a temporal-nasal orientation and analyzed as a component of the power vector (M). The average RPR for all subjects was hyperopic when WCL and when corrected with EDOF CL design, but changed to a myopic RPR when corrected with DF design. Significant differences were found between RPR curves with both CLs in all the eccentricities (Bonferroni correction p < 0.008, except 10°N). An incremental relationship between relative peripheral refraction at 30 degrees and myopia level was found. It is concluded that the two CLs work differently at the periphery in order to achieve myopia control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.