Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41321842›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology science2026

Shorter Viewing Distance Reduces Contrast in Man-Made Environments.

William E Myles, Sally A McFadden, Quan V Hoang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

William E MylesDepartment of Ophthalmology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Sally A McFaddenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Quan V HoangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Myopia is associated with increased near-work, time spent indoors, and urban environments. This may in part stem from the spatial frequency (SF) composition of the visual environment in such scenarios compared to nature. We investigated the SF content of natural and man-made environments and how the relative contrast experienced may be affected by viewing distance. Design: Experimental study of environmental contrast. Subjects Participants and Controls: Digital images (n = 594) from natural, mixed-urban, urban, and indoor environments across Singapore. Methods: The fast Fourier transform was computed and radially averaged, and the slope of the amplitude spectra with SF was determined. The total contrast energy within each SF octave ( Main Outcome Measures: Environment differences in SF gradient, total contrast, and scale invariance. Results: As expected, indoor environments displayed the steepest SF gradients at -1.36 ± 0.1, more than urban (-1.22 ± 0.1, Conclusions: The SF content of natural environments is consistent regardless of viewing distance, signifying scale invariance. This does not apply in man-made environments where contrast at all SFs directly depends on viewing distance. This implies that shorter viewing distances in man-made environments further exacerbate inherent deficits in middle and higher SF contrast, and thus these environments may fail to stimulate the eye with sufficient contrast compared to natural environments, possibly explaining why such environments induce myopia. Financial Disclosures: The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Indexed as

ContrastMyopiaScale invarianceSpatial frequencyVisual environment

Identifiers

PMID41321842
PMCPMC12661147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.