Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Study flowchart.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Mean (± standard deviation) axial elongation (AE) in Phases 1 (spectacle-wear phase) and 2 (orthokeratology phase) of various progressing groups, defined by AE in Phase 1.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Baseline data before orthokeratology lens wear, and axial elongation (AE) and change in myopia (M) before and after orthokeratology lens wear in subjects categorised by rate of myopia progression, defined by AE and change in M in the spectacle-wearing phase.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 3.

Matching of categories by axial elongation and changes in myopia in the three different age groups.

Matching pairs are indicated by ‘0’. Progression rate was under-estimated either by 1 category (indicated by ‘-1’) (i.e. ‘Rapid’ to ‘Moderate’ or ‘Moderate’ to ‘Slow’), or 2 categories (indicated by ‘-2’) (i.e. ‘Rapid’ to ‘Slow’).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Agreement in categorisation by axial elongation (AE) and change in myopia (M) in spectacle-wearing phase (Bold indicates matched categorisation).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Details of outcomes on myopia control of orthokeratology lens wear of children in different age groups classified by axial elongation (AE) and changes in myopia (M).

Outcomes were classified into ‘Ineffectual’, ‘Not clinically significant’ and ‘Significant benefit’ according to the change in AE after switching from spectacle-wear to orthokeratology lens wear.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Revised decision tree for myopia control management for children aged 6 to < 16 years.

More »

Fig 4 Expand