Long‐term Effect of Dual‐focus Contact Lenses on Myopia Progression in Children: A 6‐year Multicenter Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SIGNIFICANCE Treatment of myopic children with a dual‐focus soft contact lens (DFCL; MiSight 1 day) produced sustained slowing of myopia progression over a 6‐year period. Significant slowing was also observed in children switched from a single vision control to treatment lenses (3 years in each lens). PURPOSE This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of DFCLs in sustaining slowed progression of juvenile‐onset myopia over a 6‐year treatment period and assess myopia progression in children who were switched to a DFCL at the end of year 3. METHODS Part 1 was a 3‐year clinical trial comparing DFCLs with a control contact lens (Proclear 1 day) at four investigational sites. In part 2, subjects completing part 1 were invited to continue for 3 additional years during which all children were treated with MiSight 1 day DFCLs (52 and 56 from the initially treated [T6] and control [T3] groups, respectively). Eighty‐five subjects (45 [T3] and 40 [T6]) completed part 2. Cyclopleged spherical equivalent refractive errors (SEREs) and axial lengths (ALs) were monitored, and a linear mixed model was used to compare their adjusted change annually. RESULTS Average ages at part 2 baseline were 13.2 ± 1.3 and 13.0 ± 1.5 years for the T6 and T3 groups, respectively. Slowed myopia progression in the T6 group observed during part 1 was sustained throughout part 2 (mean ± standard error of the mean: change from baseline SERE [in diopters], −0.52 ± 0.076 vs. −0.51 ± 0.076; change in AL [in millimeters], 0.28 ± 0.033 vs. 0.23 ± 0.033; both P >. 05). Comparing progression rates in part 2 for the T6 and T3 groups, respectively, indicates that prior treatment does not influence efficacy (SERE, −0.51 ± 0.076 vs. −0.34 ± 0.077; AL, 0.23 ± 0.03 vs. 0.18 ± 0.03; both P >. 05). Within‐eye comparisons of AL growth revealed a 71% slowing for the T3 group (3 years older than part 1) and further revealed a small subset of eyes (10%) that did not respond to treatment. CONCLUSIONS Dual‐focus soft contact lenses continue to slow the progression of myopia in children over a 6‐year period revealing an accumulation of treatment effect. Eye growth of the initial control cohort with DFCL was slowed by 71% over the subsequent 3‐year treatment period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".