Trial reportOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2025
Clinical evaluation of MyoCare in Europe (CEME) for myopia management: One-year results.
Trial report in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual Performance of Defocus Incorporated Multiple Segments With Triple Enhanced Design Spectacle Lenses Versus DIMS and Single Vision Lenses.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Trial
- Defocus Incorporated Multiple Segments (DIMS) spectacle lenses in UK children: Outcomes from a 2-year multi-site interventional trial.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025Trial
- 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) · 2025Trial
- Two-Year Efficacy of Cylindrical Annular Refractive Elements Spectacle Lenses for Myopia Control in European Children.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Myopia management functional lenses (MMFL): a bibliometric analysis of multidisciplinary perspective and trend insights in the context of vision health.International ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Myopia-control Spectacle Lenses: Clincial setting Performance from a Retrospective Cohort Study.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Real-World Effectiveness of CARE-Based Spectacle Lenses for Myopia Control in a Turkish Pediatric Cohort.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Control effect of dual-mechanism myopia control lenses on myopia in children and adolescents: a prospective, 12-month, non-randomized, parallel-controlled, and single-center trial protocol.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The Role of Spectacle Lenses in the Control and Management of Myopia Progression: A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the efficacy of CARE spectacle lenses in slowing myopia progression among European children.
methodsIn a 2-year randomised, parallel-group, double-masked, multicentre clinical trial, 234 European children aged 6-13 years were enrolled. All participants were myopic, with a cycloplegic spherical equivalent refractive error (SE) between -0.75 D and -5.00 D, astigmatism ≤1.50 D, anisometropia ≤1.00 D and myopia progression of at least 0.50 D in the previous year. The treatment group received MyoCare spectacle lenses with cylinder annular refractive elements (CARE), the control group single-vision lenses (SVL). Axial length (AL) and SE were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Wearability questionnaires were administered at 1 week and 3 months. Central and peripheral visual acuity (VA) was recorded at dispensing and after 3 months. Generalised linear models estimated changes in SE and AL, adjusting for lens type, age and baseline measurements.
resultsAfter 12 months, children wearing CARE lenses showed less myopia progression, with a difference in SE and AL progression (compared to SVL) of -0.21 D (CI: 0.10 to 0.32 D) and 0.14 mm (CI: -0.17 to -0.10 mm), respectively. Central VA did not decrease with CARE lenses. Peripheral VA decreased by 0.10 and 0.09 logMAR in the nasal and temporal zones, respectively. Analysis of fast progressors indicated that 39.7% of SVL wearing eyes progressed by ≤-0.50 D/year compared to 21.1% with CARE (p < 0.01). For AL, 56.0% of SVL children had an elongation ≥0.20 mm compared to 21.3% with CARE (p < 0.01).
conclusionsIn European children, myopia progression was significantly slower with CARE lenses compared with SVL after 1 year of lens wear. Further monitoring will provide a comprehensive evaluation of long-term efficacy.
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.