Observational studyBMC ophthalmology2026
Evaluation of myopia progression in different educational models.
Observational study in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Development and validation of a knowledge, attitude, and practice scale for myopia prevention and control among parents of children and adolescents.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMyopia is a leading cause of distance vision impairment and a growing global public health concern. This study investigates the association between different educational models, defined as the type of schooling system and its associated curricular and environmental characteristics, and myopia progression in school-aged children.
methodsThis retrospective observational study included 342 myopic students aged 10–15 years in Uşak, Türkiye, divided into three groups: Group 1 (standard curriculum), Group 2 (rote-learning boarding school), and Group 3 (project-based education for gifted students). All underwent at least two examinations, including cycloplegic autorefraction and optical biometry. Annual changes in spherical equivalent (ΔSE) and axial length (ΔAL) were analyzed using multivariable linear regression adjusted for age, sex, parental myopia, screen time, and follow-up duration, with generalized estimating equation (GEE) models as sensitivity analyses.
resultsGroup 2 demonstrated the highest annual myopic progression (− 0.37 ± 0.16 D/year), followed by Group 1 (− 0.23 ± 0.22 D/year) and Group 3 (− 0.21 ± 0.15 D/year; p < 0.001). After adjustment, Group 2 showed significantly faster progression than Group 1 (β = −0.161 D/year; 95% CI: −0.219 to − 0.103; p < 0.001), while Group 3 had significantly less axial elongation (β = −0.026 mm/year; 95% CI: −0.044 to − 0.009; p = 0.003). GEE sensitivity analysis confirmed these results.
conclusionsThe educational environment is independently associated with myopia progression in children. Intensive near-work educational settings were associated with faster myopic shift. The educational context should be considered when developing myopia prevention strategies.
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.