Table 4.
Primary outcomes from baseline (2 years) – Change in refractive error
| Outcome | Comparison | Number of subjects (primary studies) | Measure of effect (95% CI) | Direction of effect | I2 (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Change in refractive error | Undercorrected versus fully corrected spectacles | 142 (2) | MD = 0.17 (0.12 to 0.23) | Favours fully corrected spectacles | 0 |
| Bifocal spectacles versus single vision lens spectacles | 351 (3) | MD = − 0.19 (− 0.59 to 0.21) | Favours bifocal spectacles | 85 | |
| 1% atropine versus placebo | 400 (1) | MD = − 0.92 (− 1.08 to − 0.76) | Favours atropine | N/A | |
| 2% pirenzepine gel versus placebo | 74 (1) | MD = − 0.41 (− 0.70 to − 0.12) | Favours pirenzepine | N/A | |
| RGPCLs versus spectacles or SCLs | 398 (2) | MD = − 0.16 (− 0.33 to − 0.00) | Favours RGPCLs | 92 | |
| Concentric ring bifocal SCLs versus SVSCLs | 128 (1) | MD = − 0.20 (− 0.38 to − 0.02) | Favours concentric ring bifocal SCLs | N/A | |
| Peripheral add multifocal SCLs versus SVLs | 99 (2) | MD = − 0.50 (− 0.65 to − 0.35) | Favours peripheral add multifocal SCLs | 0 | |
| ΟΚ versus SCLs or SVLs | 39 (1) | MD = − 0.66 (−1.01 to − 0.31) | Favours OK | N/A | |
| PALs versus SVLs | 940 (4) | MD = − 0.15 (− 0.40 to 0.11) | Favours PALs | 89 |
CI confidence interval, MD Mean Difference, N/A not applicable, PALs progressive addition lenses, RGPCLs rigid gas permeable contact lenses, SCLs soft contact lenses, SVLs single vision lenses, SVSCLs single vision soft contact lenses