ArticleBMC ophthalmology2024
Three optical intervention methods for low myopia control in children: a one-year follow-up study.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Three Myopia Control Lenses: A Multicenter, Real-World Study of 5182 Adolescents and Children in Chongqing, China.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Establishing a prediction model for the therapeutic outcomes of short-term and long-term orthokeratology treatment: using baseline data and changes in AL as dynamic variables.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Baseline ocular biometrics in children with orthokeratology-induced axial length reduction or elongation.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the one-year efficacy of myopia prevention and control using three optical intervention methods - single vision lens (SVL), high aspherical lenticule (HAL), and orthokeratology (OK) lens - in children with low myopia.
methodsA cohort of 150 children aged 7-13 years with low myopia was recruited and divided into three groups: SVL (n = 50), HAL (n = 50), and OK lens group (n = 50), based on their preference for glasses. Follow-up assessments were carried out over one year, focusing on data from the right eye for statistical analysis. Baseline characteristics such as gender, age, axial length (AL), spherical equivalent refractive error (SER), flat keratometry (K1), steep keratometry (K2), anterior chamber depth (ACD), white-to-white corneal diameter (WTW), and non-contact tonometry (NCT) measurements were gathered and compared among the three groups before any intervention. Changes in AL growth after 1 year of intervention were assessed across the three groups. Subsequently, the AL growth control rates between the HAL and OK lens groups were compared, with the SVL group serving as the reference standard.
resultsThe study found no statistically significant variances in baseline characteristics (gender, age, SER, AL, K1, K2, WTW, and NCT) among the SVL, HAL, and OK lens groups (all p > 0.05). Following a one-year intervention, AL growth rates were as follows: HAL group (0.163 ± 0.113 mm) < OK lens group (0.280 ± 0.170 mm) < SVL group (0.516 ± 0.190 mm), with statistically significant disparities (p < 0.05). The HAL group demonstrated a higher 1-year AL growth control rate (68.41%) compared to the OK lens group (45.74%) for children aged 7-13 with low myopia, with a statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). And there was significant difference in the SER change between SVL group and HAL group (p < 0.001).
conclusionCompared to SVL, HAL and OK lens are more effective in controlling axial growth in mild myopia. Specifically, HAL maybe shows superior outcomes in both preventive and corrective measures, also it needs to be supported by more studies from randomized controlled experiments.
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.