Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38904856›Full record

SynthesisInternational ophthalmology2024

Benefits and risks of orthokeratology treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lauren Sartor, Damien S Hunter, Mai Linh Vo, Chameen Samarawickrama

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Compliance with orthokeratology lens wear: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Lauren Sartor *Centre for Vision Research, Westmead Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Damien S Hunter *Centre for Vision Research, Westmead Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia.
Mai Linh Vo *Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Chameen SamarawickramaCentre for Vision Research, Westmead Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia. chameen.sams@sydney.edu.au.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1175949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis meta-analysis reviews the evidence for the risks and benefits associated with orthokeratology (OK) treatment compared with other methods of myopia control in children and adults.

methodsA systematic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Pubmed, Embase and Ovid was conducted from database inception to 22nd August 2021. Studies that reported on risks, visual and ocular biometric effects of OK in patients > 5 years of age with myopia (- 0.75 to - 6.00D) were included. Main outcomes are change in axial length and any adverse event.

resultsFourty-five papers were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The quality of data was variable and of moderate certainty, and selection bias likely skewed the results towards a relative benefit for OK. The rate of axial elongation in children was lower for OK treatment compared to other treatment modalities at one year (MD - 0.16 mm, 95% CI - 0.25 to - 0.07). Rate of change in axial length in children rebounded after OK discontinuation compared to participants who continued treatment (MD 0.10 mm, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.14). Adults and children wearing OK were up to 3.79 times more likely to experience an adverse event when compared with conventional contact lenses (OR 3.79, 95% CI 1.24 to ll.), though this evidence base is underdeveloped and requires additional well-designed studies for substantial conclusions to be drawn.

conclusionsOK arrests myopia progression while in use, however, there remain unanswered questions about the optimal duration of treatment, discontinuation effects and long-term risk for adverse events.

Indexed as

MyopiaOrthokeratologic ProceduresRefraction, OcularAxial Length, EyeChildContact LensesHumansRisk AssessmentVisual AcuityAxial lengthContact lensMicrobial keratitisMyopiaOrthokeratology

Identifiers

PMID38904856
PMCPMC11192849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.