Back

Quantifying interocular asymmetry of axial elongation in childhood myopia: metric framework, prevalence, and age-related dynamics

Nesterenko, R.

2026-07-23 ophthalmology
10.64898/2026.07.18.26358405 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Interocular asymmetry of axial elongation predicts accelerated myopia progression in adults, but childhood prevalence and dynamics are uncharacterised, with no standardised metric. A scale-invariant metric is proposed and characterised in a paediatric cohort with progressive myopia. Methods: A retrospective cohort of 267 children (5-16 years; 913 follow-up intervals) with progressive myopia and routine optical biometry collected during 2015-2026 was analysed. The Relative Asymmetry Index was defined per interval as the absolute interocular axial length difference normalised to the larger eye's change; its patient-level median defined the Cumulative Relative Asymmetry Index (CRAI). An annualised Absolute Asymmetry Index (AAI) was introduced as a complementary rate metric. Results: Median CRAI was 22.7 % [interquartile range 12.8-38.8]; median AAI 0.073 mm/year. Statistically detectable asymmetry (AAI > minimal detectable change at 95 % confidence) was present in 15 % of patients; 13.9 % showed pronounced asymmetry (CRAI > 50 %; AAI 0.218 mm/year). CRAI rose with age (Spearman rho = +0.28; partial rho = +0.25 after adjustment for net axial length change rate, both p < 0.001), and was independent of the overall rate after age adjustment (partial rho = -0.08, p = 0.20), consistent with scale invariance. The overall net axial length change rate decreased approximately three-fold across age strata (rho = -0.23, p < 0.001). Conclusions: CRAI and AAI provide complementary approximately scale-invariant and absolute metrics of interocular asymmetry. Interocular asymmetry appears common in this cohort and shows a marked age-related rise independent of overall progression rate.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.