Trial reportTechnology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine2023
Comparison of the clinical effects between digital keratoplasty and traditional orthokeratology lenses for correcting juvenile myopia.
Trial report in Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of the study design and statistical practices in randomized controlled trials on myopia treatment (2019-2023).BMC ophthalmology · 2025Pooled it
- The Predictive Value of Trace Elements in Blood Combined with Systemic Inflammatory Factors on the Effectiveness of Orthokeratology in the Treatment of Myopia.Biological trace element research · 2026Article
- Clinical advantages of multifocal soft contact lenses in myopia control for adolescents.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVarious methods exist to intervene with and control myopia, including bifocal lenses, multifocal lenses, pirenzepine, atropine, soft gas-permeable contact lenses and aberration control frame lenses, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
objectiveTo compare the clinical effectiveness of digital keratoplasty lenses and traditional orthokeratology (OK) lenses in correcting juvenile myopia.
methodsSixty-one patients (122 eyes) with an average age of 10.43 ± 1.71 years and with myopia were enrolled from January 2021 to January 2022 in the treatment centre of our hospital. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group I (the experimental group) consisted of 30 patients who were treated with digital corneal shaping (MCT) lenses, while group II (the control group) consisted of 31 patients who were treated with traditional OK lenses. Clinical indicators, such as visual acuity, ocular axis, intraocular pressure, degree of central positioning, naked visual acuity and first-order spotting, were statistically analysed before and after fitting.
resultsThe naked eye vision of patients using MCT lenses was significantly improved compared with patients who used traditional OK lenses (0.95 ± 0.28 > 0.58 ± 0.25; p< 0.05). Moreover, the risk of primary spot staining was reduced (p< 0.05), intraocular pressure was lower (p< 0.05) and the centre position reached 100% in patients wearing MCT lenses, suggesting that wearing MCT lenses may be more beneficial than wearing traditional OK lenses.
conclusionCompared with traditional OK lenses, MCT lenses reduce the degree of myopia, have significant effects and have the added advantages of safety and reliability.
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.