Skip to main content

Table 3 Primary outcomes from baseline (1 year) – Change in axial length

From: Efficacy and safety of interventions to control myopia progression in children: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Outcome

Comparison

Number of subjects (primary studies)

Measure of effect (95% CI)

Direction of effect

I2 (%)

Change in axial length

Undercorrected versus fully corrected spectacles

94 (1)

MD = 0.05 (− 0.01 to 0.11)

Favours full correction

N/A

RGPCLs versus spectacles or SCLs

415 (2)

MD = − 0.02 (− 0.05 to 0.10)

Favours spectacles/SCLs

0

2% pirenzepine gel versus placebo

264 (2)

MD = − 0.10 (− 0.18 to − 0.01)

Favours pirenzepine

0

Concentric ring bifocal SCLs versus SVSCLs

264 (3)

MD = − 0.12 (− 0.19 to − 0.06)

Favours concentric ring bifocal SCLs

66

1% atropine versus control

586 (3)

MD = − 0.36 (− 0.41 to − 0.30)

Favours atropine

46

Peripheral add multifocal SCLs versus SVLs - RCTs

294 (5)

MD = − 0.10 (− 0.14 to − 0.05)

Favours peripheral add multifocal SCLs

37

ΟΚ versus SCLs or SVLs

524 (8)

MD = − 0.19 (− 0.21 to − 0.16)

Favours OK

0

PALs versus SVLs

211 (2)

MD = − 0.08 (− 0.14 to 0.02)

Favours PALs

65

  1. CI confidence interval, MD Mean Difference, N/A not applicable, OK Orthokeratology, PALs progressive addition lenses, RGPCLs rigid gas permeable contact lenses, SCLs soft contact lenses, SVLs single vision lenses, SVSCLs single vision soft contact lenses