Boy holding a glowing balloon, symbolising a clearer future for children through evidence-based myopia control.

EVIDENCE · MEASUREMENT · INTERVENTION

The international evidence hub for myopia control.

Clinical evidence changes faster than most websites do. Myopia.website organises current research, measurement tools, treatment strategies and safety evidence into one continuously updated resource.

EXPLORE THE EVIDENCE → AXIAL LENGTH TOOLS → CLINICAL FRAMEWORKS →

SCOPE

Evidence synthesis for clinicians and researchers

REFERENCE SET

Verified primary studies, reviews and consensus documents

TOOLS

Axial length centiles and educational trajectory modelling

SISTER PROJECT

Polish evidence dossiers at Krótkowzroczność.pl

01 LIVE EVIDENCE MAP

Every question in myopia control leads to a node.

Interventions on the left, measurement and timing on the right. Each node opens a synthesis with the primary studies behind it.

INTERVENTIONS

CENTRAL NODE

MYOPIA
CONTROL

Slowing axial elongation in childhood, with monitoring and safety as part of the intervention.

MEASUREMENT · TIMING · SAFETY

02 WHAT WORKS NOW

The state of the evidence, not a ranking of products.

No single treatment is best for every patient. What follows is the maturity of the evidence base per strategy, and where it stops.

{{ tier.kicker }} {{ tier.title }}

{{ item.label }} {{ item.note }} EVIDENCE NODE →

03 AXIAL LENGTH LAB

Read an axial length against a published centile chart.

Enter age, sex and axial length. The Lab places each eye on the Europe + Australia centile reference, then models refractive trajectory scenarios as an optional second step.

{{ f.tag }}

OPEN THE AXIAL LENGTH LAB →

Educational tool. It is not an automated diagnosis and not an individual treatment recommendation.

CENTILE REFERENCE · MALES AL / mm

P97 P75 P50 P25

Kneepkens SCM, Lingham G, van Hemert DJ, et al.; CREAM-Kids Consortium. Global Axial Length Centile Charts. JAMA Ophthalmology. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2026.2539 · Supplement 1, eTable 3 · Europe + Australia.

04 TREATMENT LANDSCAPE

Combination therapy first. RLRL second. Defocus optics third.

Order follows the strategic hierarchy used across this project. Each entry states its evidence basis as the actual source type, not a maturity grade. Absolute effects come from the study that defines the entry; where a dimension has no comparable published data, the cell reads Evidence insufficient / evolving.

1

STRONGEST CURRENT MODEL OF INTENSIVE MYOPIA-PROGRESSION CONTROL

Combination therapy

RLRL + defocus optics / myopia-control spectacle lenses

In the study that defines this row, the two mechanisms together outperformed either one alone. Combining them is the most intensive control strategy in this synthesis: neither optical defocus nor red light on its own reproduced the combined effect.

{{ s.label }}

{{ s.value }}

WHAT THE STUDY REPORTS

Adjusted mean yearly axial change was −0.13 mm with combination therapy, against −0.04 mm for red light alone and +0.16 mm for defocus lenses alone (p < 0.0001). Spherical equivalent moved +0.09 D in the combined group while both monotherapy groups progressed. No adverse event was observed or reported in any of the three groups.

WHAT IT DOES NOT SETTLE

A retrospective cohort with no single-vision control arm and unbalanced group sizes, adjusted through a mixed model. Cycloplegia was not performed at every visit, so the refractive figures can be confounded. The authors call for randomised trials to validate the synergy.

DOI 10.1038/S41598-024-81363-5 ↗

2

HIGHEST-RANKED MONOTHERAPY IN THIS SYNTHESIS

Repeated low-level red-light therapy

RLRL · red light

RLRL is placed second because it produced the largest reported axial-length effect among the single-method strategies compared here. The effect signal is strong; the long-term safety record is still limited and device-specific.

{{ s.label }}

{{ s.value }}

DOI 10.1038/S41598-026-40199-X ↗ 20-STUDY SAFETY REVIEW · PMID 39672511 ↗ OPEN THE RLRL NODE →

3

ESTABLISHED OPTICAL MONOTHERAPY

Defocus optics

Myopia-control spectacle lenses

One category, not a product ranking. DIMS, HAL and related lenslet designs are technologies within myopia-control spectacle lenses; they are treated here as a single strategy built on peripheral myopic defocus.

{{ s.label }}

{{ s.value }}

PMID 31142465 ↗ DOI 10.1038/S41598-026-40199-X ↗

FURTHER STRATEGIES · IN PROJECT HIERARCHY ORDER

          STRATEGY
          EVIDENCE BASIS
          AXIAL-LENGTH EFFECT
          INVASIVENESS
          MONITORING
          
        

{{ m.rank }} {{ m.name }} {{ m.category }}

{{ m.sign }}

SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS

COMBINATION EVIDENCE

MAIN LIMITATION

DEFINING STUDY {{ m.source }} {{ m.hrefLabel }} ↗

MODEL PARAMETER · NOT A MEASURED EFFECT

The reduction percentages used by the Axial Length Lab trajectory model (defocus optics ≈ 60%, RLRL 80–95%, atropine 0.01% 10–15%) are explicit scenario parameters, harmonising results reported in dioptres and millimetres. They are auditable model inputs, not per-patient efficacy, and they are not a common scoring scale across products.

05 KNOWLEDGE NODE

Repeated Low-Level Red-Light Therapy

A large short-term effect on axial elongation, an incomplete long-term safety record, and an unresolved rebound question. The node keeps mechanism, trial evidence, safety and tapering separate rather than merging them into one claim.

OPEN THE RLRL NODE →

06 SAFETY NODE

RLRL and Atropine — Concurrent Use Is Contraindicated

The Eyerising instructions for use list a dilated pupil and medicines such as atropine among the contraindications. For that device, concurrent use is not permitted. Comparative trials did not expose children to both therapies and therefore cannot establish the safety of concurrent use.

OPEN THE SAFETY NODE →

07 CLINICAL FRAMEWORKS

The Nowak Method

A physician-supervised clinical implementation framework translating current evidence into a structured pathway for measurement, eligibility assessment, intervention selection, monitoring and treatment modification.

Myopia.website indexes it as one referenced framework among clinical resources. The full protocol, its revisions and its versioned record stay with the authoring source.

PRIMARY SOURCE ↗ ZENODO RECORD ↗

{{ step.title }} {{ step.body }}

08 EVIDENCE LIBRARY

Every claim on this site resolves to one of these.

Verified entries only. Each record carries study type, intervention, the short result and a resolvable identifier.

{{ ref.title }} {{ ref.authors }} · {{ ref.journal }}

{{ ref.id }} ↗

Records carry the verification status held in the source register. Product pages, regulatory records and availability snapshots are listed as operational sources and are not evidence of comparative efficacy.

09 EXPERT CONTRIBUTORS

A reviewed platform, not one clinician's page.

Contribution is structured by role. Every node records who wrote it, who reviewed it and against which sources.

{{ r.tag }}

{{ r.title }} {{ r.body }}

NAMED CONTRIBUTOR

Prof. Michał Szymon Nowak Epidemiology · RLRL · The Nowak Method

Attribution is scoped to the nodes where the contribution is substantive. Other nodes carry other authors and reviewers, and the platform is designed to hold ophthalmologists, optometrists, researchers and reviewers on equal footing.

10 SISTER PROJECT

Krótkowzroczność.pl

The Polish evidence and public-information platform on childhood myopia, treatment methods, axial-length monitoring and clinical safety.

Two complementary entities, not one site in two languages. The Polish platform holds the full dossiers, the Polish treatment landscape and public education. Myopia.website holds international synthesis, comparison and tools. Where a synthesis here rests on a Polish dossier, it cites it as a source.

VISIT THE POLISH PLATFORM ↗

{{ d.tag }}