ReviewDie Ophthalmologie2025
[Assessment of myopia progression].
Review in Die Ophthalmologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global increase in myopia prevalence and associated secondary complications necessitates adequate monitoring of myopia progression. This review highlights the advantages and disadvantages of the most commonly used target parameters for assessing myopia progression: refractive error and axial length. Although refractive error is essential for the diagnosis and optical correction of myopia, axial length proves to be a more reliable and clinically relevant parameter for monitoring progression and guiding preventive interventions. Axial length correlates more strongly with the risk of ocular complications and is less susceptible to diurnal variations and interventions that alter the eye's refractive power. Assessing myopia progression under preventive measures requires consideration of age-dependent physiological changes in axial length. Standardized comparison parameters, such as the cumulative absolute reduction in axial elongation (CARE) can facilitate the objective evaluation of the efficacy of the intervention. Regular monitoring of refraction and axial length should also be performed in young adults with risk factors, as myopia onset and progression can occur even at this age.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40691358What 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.