MultifocAL COntact Lenses for Myopia (MALCOLM) control in Australian children: a study protocol for a double-blind, contralateral eye, non-inferiority, randomised controlled clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Myopia is the most common refractive error worldwide, but each dioptre increase in myopia leads to an increased risk of degenerative eye disease and permanent vision impairment. Soft contact lens (CL) designs have been developed to slow myopia and potentially reduce long-term risk, but there is still a need for additional designs of varied materials and parameters to cater for diverse patient needs. The MultifocAL COntact Lenses for Myopia control study aims to compare the efficacy of the Acuvue Oasys for Presbyopia (AOP) CL against the Food and Drug Administration approved MiSight 1-Day multifocal CL in controlling progressive myopia in children using a non-inferiority contralateral eye design. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A double-blind, contralateral eye, non-inferiority, randomised, controlled clinical trial will be conducted at University of New South Wales Sydney, Australia (UNSW). Children (6 to 12 years of age, inclusive) will be randomised to wear AOP in their right or left eye, with the MiSight 1-Day CL fitted to the contralateral eye. The primary outcome is the difference in axial length and cycloplegic objective refraction change between the two CLs over 12 months. Additional outcomes include quality of life, pupillometry and adherence to treatment. To achieve a statistical power of 80% to demonstrate non-inferiority of the AOP to the MiSight 1-Day and taking into consideration a 20% discontinuation rate, the calculated sample size is 72. This trial started recruitment during the recent COVID-19 pandemic in January 2021. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained from the UNSW Human Research Ethics Committee (HC200052), and the study complies with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use Good Clinical Practice guidelines. The results of this trial will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000159954, CTN-00 282-1 v2, NCT06887920.
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 | 0.041 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.007 |
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".