Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40932453›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2025

IMI-2025 Digest.

Nina Tahhan, Mark A Bullimore, Xiangui He, Lisa A Ostrin, Timothy J Gawne, Kate L Gifford, Pauline Kang, Ian Morgan, Aude Couturier, Kyoko Ohno-Matsui and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Nasotemporal Asymmetry in Ocular Biometry as a Biomarker for Myopia Progression in Chinese Children.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Nina TahhanBrien Holden Vision Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Mark A BullimoreUniversity of Houston, College of Optometry, Houston, Texas, United States.
Xiangui HeShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention and Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Lisa A OstrinUniversity of Houston, College of Optometry, Houston, Texas, United States.
Timothy J GawneDepartment of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), Birmingham, Alabama, United States.
Kate L GiffordQueensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Pauline KangSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Ian MorganResearch School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Canberra, Australia.
Aude CouturierFrench Myopia Institute, Ophthalmology Department, Foundation Adolphe de Rothschild Hospital, Paris, France.
Kyoko Ohno-MatsuiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Nicola S LoganSchool of Optometry, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Ian FlitcroftMater Misericordiae Hospital and Technological University Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As myopia research expands in scope and complexity, the International Myopia Institute (IMI) continues to provide timely, evidence-based consensus guidance through its biennial white papers and digests. The IMI 2025 Digest delivers targeted updates in areas identified for revision since the previous digest: definitions and classification of myopia, clinical management guidelines, risk factors, accommodation and binocular vision, experimental models, and onset and progression in young adults. A major focus is the evolving concept of pre-myopia, including a refined understanding of hyperopic reserve as a predictive marker, population-specific thresholds, and the distinction between risk and predictive factors. Emerging evidence supports earlier identification and targeted interventions during the pre-myopic phase to delay onset. Clinical management updates highlight that delaying onset by even 1 year may have greater lifetime benefit than multiple years of progression control. Other updates address the limited causal inference of many current risk factor studies, new molecular insights from experimental models, and evidence that a subset of young adults, particularly with high myopia, continue to progress at meaningful rates. Collectively, the IMI 2025 Digest underscores the importance of proactive, individualized myopia care, equipping clinicians with current, evidence-based guidance while supporting continued research and innovation.

Indexed as

MyopiaOphthalmologyPractice Guidelines as TopicRefraction, OcularAccommodation, OcularDisease ProgressionHumansRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID40932453
PMCPMC12448141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.