Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39974171›Full record

ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2025

Comparison of Myopic Progression and Quality of Life Wearing Either DIMs Lenses or Single-Vision Myopia Correcting Spectacles.

Xiaoying Li, Wei Ma, Yutong Song, Maurice Yap, Longqian Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Myopia control efficacy of individualised ocular refraction customisation spectacle lenses: A 2-year follow-up study.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Trial
  3. Clinical evaluation of MyoCare in Europe (CEME) for myopia management: One-year results.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Trial
  4. Review
  5. 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

5 authors.

Xiaoying LiDepartment of Ophthalmology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-6795-7212
Wei MaDepartment of Ophthalmology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9693-0885
Yutong SongDepartment of Ophthalmology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6330-5131
Maurice YapSchool of Optometry, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4687-4101
Longqian LiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2265-4625

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Identifiers

PMID39974171
PMCPMC11839264

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.