Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39652182›Full record

SynthesisGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2025

Efficacy of spectacle lenses specifically designed for myopia control: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Julia Perea-Romero, Isabel Signes-Soler, Laura Badenes-Ribera, Ana Tauste

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Spectacle lenses for control of myopia progression in children.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Management of myopia: a mini-review.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

4 authors.

Julia Perea-RomeroDepartment of Optics and Optometry and Vision Sciences, Universitat de València, Burjassot, Valencia, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-1270-7280
Isabel Signes-SolerDepartment of Optometry and Vision Science, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, P.O. Box, 190-50100, Kakamega, Kenya. isabel.signes@uv.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5525-9392
Laura Badenes-RiberaDepartment of Behavioral Sciences Methodology, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4706-690X
Ana TausteResearch Group in Preventive Optometry and Visual Treatments - OPTV, Department of Optics and Optometry and Vision Sciences, Universitat de València, Av. Universitat s/n, 46100, Burjassot, Valencia, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5139-6509

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the efficacy of spectacle lenses designed to control myopia progression in individuals under 18 years old, focusing on changes in spherical equivalent refraction (SER), axial length (AL) and relative peripheral refraction (RPR).

methodsA systematic review was conducted according to Prisma guidelines. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, covering studies from the last six years without language restrictions. Studies were included based on specific criteria, and data were extracted and analysed using the metafor package in R. Separate meta-analyses were conducted for SER and AL at 12- and 24-month follow-ups, using random-effects models. RPR information was synthesized without meta-analysis.

resultsOut of the 796 studies screened, 21 were included in the review, with 17 selected for the meta-analysis, comprising a total of 6,175 patients. At 12 months, the intervention group showed a significant reduction in SER (d+ = -0.281, p < .0001) and AL (d+ = -0.155, p < .0001) compared to the control group, where d + is the pooled mean effect size estimate. However, at 24 months, no significant differences were observed in SER (d+ = -0.385, p = .067) or AL (d+ = -0.272, p = .137) between groups. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings, and publication bias was minimal. Regarding RPR, the results are limited and differ among model lenses.

conclusionSpectacle lenses designed to control myopia progression show short-term benefits, significantly reducing SER and AL at 12 months. However, their long-term efficacy remains uncertain, with no significant differences observed at 24 months. Further research is needed to understand treatment response factors and evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of these lenses in myopia management.

Indexed as

EyeglassesMyopiaRefraction, OcularVisual AcuityAxial Length, EyeDisease ProgressionEquipment DesignHumansTreatment OutcomeAxial lengthMyopia controlMyopia progressionSpectacle lensesSpherical equivalent refraction

Identifiers

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.