ReviewPatient preference and adherence2025
Assessing Previous Strategies and Presenting a Novel Smart Glasses to Enhance Adherence to Amblyopia Therapy in Children.
Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of RCTs on Efficacy of Conventional vs. Emerging Treatments for Amblyopia.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Amblyopia treatment in children, often involving patching or atropine, faces significant challenges with adherence. Adherence to patching is often poor due to discomfort and psychosocial factors such as social stigma, while adherence data for atropine treatment remains scarce, hindering a clear understanding of patients' adherence in real-world settings. This review assesses both traditional methods and alternative strategies aimed at improving adherence, including Bangerter filters, binocular therapies, intermittent occlusion, and perceptual learning. While these alternatives help reduce the treatment burden, they do not consistently outperform conventional methods in improving visual outcomes and still face notable adherence challenges, especially in older children. Educational interventions, such as cartoons and motivational tools, show promise in improving adherence, especially in low-adherence populations, but their long-term effectiveness has yet to be established. Digital therapies such as Luminopia and CureSight represent promising alternatives to traditional amblyopia treatments, with preliminary evidence indicating improvements in visual outcomes and adherence. Nevertheless, further research is necessary to determine their efficacy and how they compare to established methods. Building on this, we hypothesize that the AmblySmart glasses, a novel technology that integrates with smart devices, could further improve adherence by linking treatment to children's screen time. However, further studies are needed to investigate this technology's effectiveness and practicality compared to traditional methods. Overall, this review highlights the importance of developing innovative approaches to optimize adherence and improve treatment outcomes in amblyopic children.
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.