ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Low-Dose Atropine for Pediatric Myopia: First-Year Progression as a Risk-Stratification and Management Signal.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 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.
- Routine baseline clinical data do not reliably predict poor first-year myopia control with low-dose atropine: a machine-learning benchmarking study.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To determine whether first-year refractive progression predicts longer-term on-treatment myopia control and whether early progression guides escalation decisions and subsequent trajectories. Design: Retrospective cohort, single practice. Participants: Five hundred fifty-five children (1107 eyes) treated with 0.01% (93.5%) or 0.02% (6.5%) atropine for ≥12 months. Methods: Spherical equivalent refraction (SER) progression was annualized (diopters [D]/year; positive = worse). At 12 months, eyes met or did not meet the ≤0.25 D/year threshold; children were categorized as responsive (both eyes), partially responsive (one eye), or unresponsive (neither eye). Progression was also modeled continuously (per 0.25 D/year). Escalation was defined as increasing the atropine concentration and/or adding optical therapy. Primary analyses associated 12-month response with on-treatment outcomes and progression before and after escalation. Eye-level models accounted for intereye correlation and baseline covariates. One-eye-per-subject sensitivity analyses were also performed. Main Outcome Measures: Successful control (≤0.25 D/year over on-treatment course) and change in SER progression around escalation. Results: Baseline age was 9.8 ± 2.8 years and baseline SER -2.34 ± 2.37 D. 340 (61.3%) children were responsive, 99 (17.8%) partially responsive, and 116 (20.9%) unresponsive, with successful control rates of 70%, 28%, and 17%, respectively. 12-month status strongly predicted whole-course successful control in bilateral generalized estimating equations (odds ratio [OR]: 5.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.85-8.47) and one-eye sensitivity (OR: 10.90; 95% CI: 6.32-18.80) analyses and slower whole-course progression (β -0.27 D/year, 95% CI: -0.31 to -0.23). Each +0.25 D/year of first-year progression reduced success odds (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.48-0.63). Post-12-month predictive value was attenuated relative to the whole-course analyses in both the bilateral generalized estimating equations (OR: 1.32; 95% CI: 0.94-1.86; Conclusions: Twelve-month response strongly stratifies overall on-treatment control as an early management signal, not a fixed treatment end point. Response-guided escalation slowed initial failures and attenuated post-12-month differences. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.