SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Effects of table tennis on vision in children and adolescents: a multilevel dose-response meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effects of table tennis exercise on uncorrected visual acuity-related outcomes in children and adolescents and to assess the dose-effect relationship within a dose-response framework. Methods: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines and PROSPERO registration, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and CNKI for studies published through February 11, 2026. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in Chinese or English involving children or adolescents, comparing table tennis exercise with care, no intervention, or non-table tennis controls, and reporting visual outcomes assessed with visual acuity tools. We excluded non-original, non-experimental, preclinical, and review studies; meta-analyses; conference abstracts; gray literature; duplicate publications; unavailable full texts; and consultation interventions. A three-level random-effects model (REML) was used to pool effect sizes (Hedges' g), and analyses of heterogeneity, publication bias, sensitivity, subgroup effects, and dose-response relationships were conducted using cubic splines. Results: This study included nine RCTs, comprising 32 effect sizes from 531 participants. After outlier removal, 31 effect sizes were retained for analysis. Five studies had a risk of bias. After removing one outlier, table tennis improved vision (SMD = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.42-1.41, Conclusion: Table tennis exercise may improve uncorrected visual acuity-related outcomes in children and adolescents, but the certainty of the evidence remains low because of high heterogeneity and risk-of-bias concerns. Dose-response evidence suggests that low-to-moderate doses may be most effective, offering valuable guidance for school-based programs. Due to limited reporting of exercise intensity and adherence in the included studies, the "21.3-h" optimal dose proposed here is an exploratory clinical reference, not an absolute standard. Systematic review registration: The unique identifier is CRD420261334889, which corresponds to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The publicly accessible URL is: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD420261334889.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.