ArticleBMC ophthalmology2025
Increasing myopic refraction reduces random dot stereopsis in Chinese myopic patients: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stereoacuity and ocular-associated factors in children aged 3-7 years in Guangxi, Southwest China: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- The neural signature of high myopia: structural and functional brain alterations and their cognitive-emotional associations.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 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
objectiveTo investigate the effects of myopic spherical equivalent (SE) on random dot stereopsis and influencing factors in Chinese adults with myopia.
methodsA cross-sectional design was employed, and 988 Chinese myopic individuals (520 [52.6%] females) aged 18.0-48.7 years were recruited from the People's Hospital of Guangxi. The participants underwent assessments for visual acuity, myopic SE, random dot stereopsis at 0.8 m (RDS0.8) and at 1.5 m (RDS1.5) and binocular function parameters (such as perceptual eye position (PEP), fixational eye movement, and the signal‒noise ratio (SNR)). The data were analysed via Pearson or Spearman correlations and multivariate logistic regression.
resultsAmong the 988 participants, only 53 (5.4%) presented with abnormal RDS0.8, and 834 (84.4%) presented with abnormal RDS1.5. A significant association was found between SE and the prevalence of abnormal RDS1.5 (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.03-1.26; P = 0.014) after adjusting for covariates. High myopia was more strongly associated with abnormal RDS1.5 than mild myopia was in the unadjusted model (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.03-3.26; P = 0.037). Subgroup analyses revealed that the associations between SE and abnormal RDS1.5 were stronger among females, individuals aged > 25 years, those with normal fixational eye movement, and those with abnormal SNRs. Only vertical PEP (target 1°) was significantly associated with myopic group and abnormal RDS0.8, whereas vertical PEP (target 3°), horizontal PEP (target 1°), and vertical PEP (target 1°) were significantly associated with abnormal RDS1.5.
conclusionsMyopic SE was associated with the prevalence of abnormal random dot stereopsis at 1.5 m in myopic patients, indicating that increasing myopic SE may impair distance random dot stereopsis in this population. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.