SynthesisFrontiers in public health2026
Comparative effectiveness of outdoor and exercise interventions for myopia control in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 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 compare and rank the effects of different sports and outdoor activities on myopia control in children and adolescents using network meta-analysis. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and major Chinese databases from database inception to Dec 31, 2025, for randomized controlled trials involving school-aged children and adolescents with myopia or at risk of myopia progression. Data were analysed using network meta-analysis in Stata 18.0. Treatment effects were expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs, and interventions were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials involving 9,084 participants were included. Racket sports ranked highest for slowing axial elongation (MD -0.30 mm, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.01; SUCRA 94.9%), followed by increased outdoor time (MD -0.08 mm, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.02; SUCRA 55.7%). For refractive outcomes, visual tracking exercise ranked highest for improving spherical equivalent (MD 0.38 D, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.80; SUCRA 83.7%), followed by racket sports (MD 0.29 D, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.59; SUCRA 77.0%). Subgroup analyses showed that increased outdoor time remained effective in children aged 8.5 years or younger and in interventions lasting more than 24 weeks. Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of the findings. Conclusion: Sports and outdoor activities may affect myopia control differently across outcomes. Racket sports showed the most consistent signal for slowing axial elongation, while visual tracking exercise and racket sports ranked higher for spherical equivalent. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD420261339612, identifier (CRD420261339612).
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.