ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific2023
Implementing a digital comprehensive myopia prevention and control strategy for children and adolescents in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic evaluation, resource utilisation, and associated economic burden of myopia management: a systematic literature review.Journal of global health · 2025Pooled it
- Interventions for myopia control in children: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of outdoor interventions for myopia in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- From Screening to Care: Delayed Clinical Follow-up After Childhood Myopia Identification and the Design of a Prospective Intervention Study.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Trial
- Short-term effects of distant-image screen and myopic defocus on choroidal thickness in children: a randomized pilot clinical trial.Frontiers in public health · 2026Trial
- Impact of multi-dimensional urbanization on poor vision and myopia among Chinese children and adolescents: evidence from national surveys between 2010 and 2019.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Emerging Technologies for the Management and Mitigation of Myopia Progression: A Scoping Review.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Using deep learning to explore the impacts of street-view green space on school myopia prevalence: a multicenter, cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Current status of vision and refractive errors among children and adolescents in northeast Sichuan, China: a school-based cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Real-world evidence on childhood refractive errors in a developed coastal region of China: a multi-center analysis of 4.47 million school-based screening encounters in Southern Fujian.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Lifestyle and environmental risk factors for myopia in children: Evidence from a large-scale cross-sectional study in Shandong, China.PloS one · 2026Article
- Thirty-year changes in burden for refraction disorders in China, Japan, Korea and Singapore: a jointly prevention perspective analysis.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Myopia and screen time in children: epidemic proportions.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Digital technologies in enhancing hierarchical vision health management for the next 1000 days of children's life: multi-component economic evaluation.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- School-level prediction and management of myopia in children and adolescents.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Increasing Outdoor Activity in Preventing Myopia in Children and Adolescents - China.China CDC weekly · 2025Article
- Comparative performance analysis of global and chinese-domain large language models for myopia.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- Prevalence and temporal trends in myopia and high myopia children in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis with projections from 2020 to 2050.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- Analysis of refractive development characteristics in school-age children based on biometric measurements: a cross-sectional study involving 12,025 primary school students from Xingtai City.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Vision for the future: pioneering strategies in China's battle against myopia.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Children and adolescents' myopia is a major public problem. Although the clinical effect of various interventions has been extensively studied, there is a lack of national-level and integral assessments to simultaneously quantify the economics and effectiveness of comprehensive myopia prevention and control programs. We aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness between traditional myopia prevention and control strategy, digital comprehensive myopia prevention and control strategy and school-based myopia screening program in China. Methods: A Markov model was used to compare the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness among school-based myopia screening, traditional myopia prevention and control strategy, and digital comprehensive myopia prevention and control strategy among 6 to 18-year-old rural and urban schoolchildren. Parameters were collected from published sources. The primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life-year, disability-adjusted life-year, incremental cost-utility ratio, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness and sensitivity of base-case analysis. Findings: Compared with school-based myopia screening strategy, after implementing digital comprehensive myopia prevention and control strategy, the prevalence of myopia among 18-year-old students in rural and urban areas was reduced by 3.79% and 3.48%, respectively. The incremental cost-utility ratio per quality-adjusted life-year gained with the digital myopia management plan ($11,301 for rural setting, and $10,707 for urban setting) was less than 3 times the per capita gross domestic product in rural settings ($30,501) and less than 1 time the per capita gross domestic product in urban settings ($13,856). In cost-effectiveness analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio produced by digital comprehensive myopia management strategy ($37,446 and $41,814 per disability-adjusted life-year averted in rural and urban settings) slightly exceeded the cost-effectiveness threshold. When assuming perfect compliance, full coverage of outdoor activities and spectacles satisfied the cost-effectiveness threshold, and full coverage of outdoor activities produced the lowest cost ($321 for rural settings and $808 for urban settings). Interpretations: Health economic evidence confirmed the cost-effectiveness of promoting digital comprehensive myopia prevention and control strategies for schoolchildren at the national level. Sufficient evidence provides an economic and public health reference for further action by governments, policy-makers and other myopia-endemic countries. Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China, NSFC (82171051), Beijing Natural Science Foundation (JQ20029), Capital Health Research and Development of Special (2020-2-1081), National Natural Science Foundation of China, NSFC (82071000), National Natural Science Foundation of China, NSFC (8197030562).
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.