ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Compensatory versus non-compensatory types in myopic acute acquired comitant esotropia: a new classification based on fusion ability at the far point.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy of botulinum toxin and surgical treatment for acute acquired concomitant esotropia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To propose a novel classification of acute acquired comitant esotropia (AACE) with myopia based on fusion compensation ability at the far point (FP) without myopia correction (MC) and to investigate its pathogenesis in relation to eye-use habits. Design: A retrospective case-control study. Methods: This study enrolled 105 myopic AACE patients and 107 control subjects with simple myopia. Data collected included refractive error, angle of deviation (measured by prism and alternate cover test (PACT) and Maddox prism test (MPT) at distance and near), and detailed eye-use habits. AACE patients were categorized into compensatory ( Results: A total of 98.10% of AACE patients neglected MC during prolonged near gaze before onset, a rate significantly higher than controls (13.08%). The cohort was divided into compensatory and non-compensatory groups. The compensatory group (87.62% of patients) exhibited distinct features: larger distance versus near deviation ( Conclusion: Prolonged near gaze without MC is a critical risk factor for myopic AACE. Classifying patients based on fusion compensation at the FP reveals two distinct subtypes with different clinical profiles. The compensatory type likely represents an abnormal adaptation to excessive convergence demand, whereas the non-compensatory type may indicate a decompensated mechanism. This new classification provides valuable insights for etiology and management.
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.