| Title |
Effect of undercorrection on myopia progression in 12-year-old children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00417-015-3053-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Si Yuan Li, Shi-Ming Li, Yue Hua Zhou, Luo Ru Liu, He Li, Meng Tian Kang, Si Yan Zhan, Ningli Wang, Michel Millodot |
| Abstract |
To prospectively observe the effects of undercorrection of myopia on myopia progression and axial elongation in a population of 12-year-old Chinese children. A total of 2,267 children in the Anyang Childhood Eye Study were examined at baseline, and 1,769 were followed for 1 year. Ocular examinations included cycloplegic autorefraction, axial length, visual acuity, vertometry, and accommodative lag. Questionnaires were completed by children and parents. Undercorrection of myopia was determined at baseline if presenting visual acuity could be improved by at least 2 lines with subjective refraction. Of 253 myopic children with spectacles and available information, 120 (47.4 %) were undercorrected (-4.63D to -0.50D) and 133 (52.6 %) were fully corrected. In a multivariate model adjusting for age, gender, number of myopic parents, time spent on near work and outdoor activities per day, usage and time for wearing spectacles per day, children with undercorrection had significantly more baseline myopia (P < 0.01) and longer axial length (P = 0.03) than children with full correction. However, there were no significant differences in myopia progression (P = 0.46) and axial elongation (P = 0.96) at 1 year between the two groups of children. The regression analysis showed that myopia progression significantly decreased with increasing amount of undercorrection (r (2) = 0.02, P = 0.02) in all children. Accommodative lag significantly decreased with increasing amounts of undercorrection (P < 0.01). Based on this 1-year study in Chinese children, undercorrection or full correction of myopia by wearing spectacles did not show any differences in myopia progression or axial elongation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Peru | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 86 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 23% |
| Unknown | 21 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 3% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 23 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 June 2019.
All research outputs
#6,691,364
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
#2
of 2 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,876
of 283,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 283,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.