ArticleEye and vision (London, England)2026
Comparison of effectiveness of four myopia control interventions in Chinese children: a real-world retrospective study.
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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.