Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42116122›Full record

ArticleEye and vision (London, England)2026

Comparison of effectiveness of four myopia control interventions in Chinese children: a real-world retrospective study.

Lizhen Chen, Li Sun, Xiaojing Chen, Jiaxing Liu, Jinfa Li, Hiu Ying Leung, Jingfa Zhang, Dennis S C Lam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Eye and vision (London, England), 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

8 authors.

Lizhen ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Li SunDepartment of Ophthalmology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiaojing ChenC-MER (Shenzhen) Dennis Lam Eye Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Jiaxing LiuC-MER (Shenzhen) Dennis Lam Eye Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Jinfa LiC-MER (Shenzhen) Dennis Lam Eye Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Hiu Ying LeungThe Primasia International Eye Research Institute (PIERI), School of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen), Shenzhen, China.
Jingfa ZhangThe Primasia International Eye Research Institute (PIERI), School of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen), Shenzhen, China. 13917311571@139.com.
Dennis S C LamDepartment of Ophthalmology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China. dennislam@pieri.cuhksz.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMyopia is a global public health issue, necessitating effective control strategies. Defocus incorporated multiple segments (DIMS) and highly aspherical lenslet (HAL) spectacle lenses, as well as their combination with low-concentration atropine (0.01%), have been shown to control myopia effectively. However, direct comparisons among these regimens, DIMS, HAL, DIMSA (DIMS + atropine), and HALA (HAL + atropine), are lacking. In this real-world study, we compared their effectiveness in slowing myopia progression.

methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included 347 children (694 eyes) aged 6-14 years who received one of the four interventions for at least 1 year. The primary outcome was the annual change in axial length (AL). The secondary outcome was the annual change in spherical equivalent refraction (SER). The treatment response was categorized as good, fair, or poor. Linear mixed models and generalized estimating equations were used for analysis, adjusting for covariates.

resultsAfter adjustment, annual axial elongation differed significantly among the groups (P < 0.001), with marginal means of 0.23 mm (DIMS), 0.15 mm (HAL), 0.20 mm (DIMSA), and 0.12 mm (HALA). Post hoc comparisons revealed that both HAL and HALA were superior to DIMS (P < 0.001) and that HALA was superior to DIMSA (P = 0.022). Adding 0.01% atropine to either optical monotherapy did not provide a significant additional benefit in terms of mean AL or SER outcomes. Compared with DIMS, HALA significantly increased the odds of a good response for AL (OR = 4.34, P < 0.001) and SER (OR = 5.85, P < 0.001), whereas this effect was not observed with DIMSA. Older age independently predicted better response (AL: OR = 1.46/year; SER: OR = 1.26/year; both P < 0.001).

conclusionsIn this non-randomized real-world comparison, HAL monotherapy was associated with slower SER progression, compared with DIMS. Although adding atropine did not improve mean outcomes, HALA showed the highest likelihood of a good response, suggesting a clinically meaningful benefit in response distribution. Although HALA did not consistently outperform HAL monotherapy across analyses, its advantage in achieving favourable individual responses supports its consideration for children requiring maximal intervention. These findings require confirmation in prospective randomized trials.

Indexed as

Axial lengthCombination therapyDefocus incorporated multiple segmentsHighly aspherical lensletsLow-concentration atropineMyopia controlReal-world study

Identifiers

PMID42116122
PMCPMC13162417

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.