ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2026
Efficacy and ocular surface safety of different correction methods for adolescents with high myopia.
Article in International journal of 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate efficacy and ocular surface safety of 3 kinds of different correction methods for correction of high myopia in adolescents.
methodsA prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted. From January 2022 to December 2022, 62 adolescents with high myopia (124 eyes) were recruited, with spherical refractive errors ranging from -6.00 to -7.50 diopters (D) and refractive astigmatism ≤1.50 D. All participants were randomly assigned to three groups: the orthokeratology combined with single-vision spectacle lenses (OK+SVLs) group (20 cases, 40 eyes), the peripheral defocus rigid gas permeable contact lenses (Defocus RGPCL) group (22 cases, 44 eyes), and the single-vision spectacle lenses (SVLs) group (20 cases, 40 eyes). All of them were followed up for 1.5y. The observation indicators included refractive error, axial length (AL), tear break-up time (BUT), percentage of hexagonal corneal endothelial cells (CEC), CEC density, and ocular surface adverse reactions.
resultsThe three groups had mean age of 14.84±1.87y, 14.57±1.91y, and 14.80±1.52y, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in age, gender, corneal curvature, AL, and spherical equivalent among the groups (all
conclusionOrthokeratology lenses and peripheral defocus RGPCL yield better visual acuity correction and superior image quality, which can minimize retinal image aberrations induced by high refractive errors. Both interventions achieve satisfactory corrective vision and effective myopia control effects in adolescents with high myopia, with no significant adverse reactions observed during the follow-up period, indicating a high level of wearing safety for clinical application.
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.