Relative peripheral refraction with accommodation in 6- to 11-year-olds: baseline findings from the Stockholm Myopia Study.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Assessing Peripheral Focus in Myopes and Non-myopes: Introducing "Depth-of-refraction".Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
   Article
2. Asymmetry between nasal and temporal refraction with accommodation in myopes and emmetropes.Biomedical optics express · 2026
   Article
3. Visual and Physiological Optics: introduction to the joint feature issue inBiomedical optics express · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract