SynthesisBMC ophthalmology2026
Efficacy of repeated low-level red-light therapy for myopia management in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo systematically evaluate the efficacy of repeated low-level red-light (RLRL) therapy, compared to single-vision spectacles (SVS), for controlling myopia progression in children and adolescents.
methodsA comprehensive search of electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, was conducted up to Sept 30, 2025 according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The change of axial length (AL), spherical equivalent refraction (SER) and subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) were main outcomes. Pooled mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated and heterogeneity was quantified using I
resultsFourteen randomized controlled trials involving 1,942 participants were included. The mean difference in AL change favored RLRL at 1 month (MD: -0.07 mm, 95% CI: -0.09 to -0.06, P < 0.00001), 3 months (MD: -0.15 mm, 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.11, P < 0.00001), 6 months (MD: -0.22 mm, 95% CI: -0.26 to -0.17, P < 0.00001), and 12 months (MD: -0.33 mm, 95% CI: -0.39 to -0.27, P < 0.00001). Similarly, RLRL significantly slowed SER progression at 3 months (MD: 0.17 D, 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.21, P < 0.00001), 6 months (MD: 0.38 D, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.49, P < 0.00001), and 12 months (MD: 0.67 D, 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.82, P < 0.00001). Furthermore, RLRL induced a significant increase in SFCT at all time points (16.72 μm at 1 month; 19.46 μm at 3 months; 28.21 μm at 6 months; 30.86 μm at 12 months; all P < 0.00001). Heterogeneity was substantial for AL and SER outcomes but the treatment effect was consistently favorable.
conclusionIn conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests that RLRL therapy maybe an effective intervention for slowing myopia progression in children and adolescents in the short to medium term. Based on current evidence, it appears to be a promising and generally well-tolerated treatment option. However, long-term safety, sustained efficacy, and optimal treatment protocols require further confirmation through extended follow-up studies.
trial registrationThe trial was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration ID: CRD420251139693).
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.