Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38087120›Full record

ArticleEye (London, England)2024

Models of myopia: the effect of accommodation, lenses and atropine.

Antonio Medina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Eye (London, England), 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. RLRL Therapeutic Feasibility and Potential Mechanism on Myopia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Retardation of myopia by atropine regimes.International journal of ophthalmology · 2024
    Review
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

1 author.

Antonio MedinaMassachusetts Institute of Technology, EE Research Laboratory, 77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA. puerta@alum.mit.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTwo quantitative models for myopia have been proposed and used for myopic intervention, one derived from feedback theory, and the other from physiological and mechanical considerations. This paper shows that they both predict the same results indicating that they are valid and reliable. These models are the only ones that can make predictions about the effect of atropine and lenses on myopia, explain multiple observations heretofore unexplained and offer possible interventions.

objectiveUsing their predictive power we test the models by calculating and comparing the effect of accommodation, lenses or atropine. The models offer a rationale that makes atropine equivalent to a positive lens for purposes of refractive development.

methodsThis report includes thought experiments, actual experiments and trials, as well as an analysis of clinical data and integrates and tests results from all of them for far-reaching conclusions.

resultsBoth models accurately predict the same myopia progression caused by near work. These models are simple but powerful enough to suggest what treatments are indicated. Interventions for prevention and control of myopia are evaluated analytically, in particular atropine and optical treatments, such as positive lenses and under correction.

conclusionOptical treatments have enormous potential; atropine is of questionable value since there are ways to get the same or superior effect with lenses of power calculated as described here.

Indexed as

Accommodation, OcularAtropineMydriaticsMyopiaDisease ProgressionEyeglassesHumansModels, BiologicalRefraction, OcularAtropineMydriatics

Identifiers

PMID38087120
PMCPMC11076616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.