Skip to content
2000
image of A Review on Correlation Between Autorefractometer and Cycloplegic Refraction with Subjective Acceptance in Children Aged 6-15 Years

Abstract

Introduction

Autorefraction is fast, yet accommodation can distort pediatric measurements, and cycloplegic refraction minimizes accommodation and therefore could be more suitable for functional eyesight. The correlation between the readings of the autorefractometer, cycloplegic refraction, and the subjective acceptance was systematically reviewed in children aged between 6 and 15 years.

Methods

Following PRISMA, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched (20002024) in search of studies comparing the outcomes of autorefraction, cycloplegic refraction, and/or subjective refraction in children. Risk of bias (QUADAS-2) was assessed using duplicate assessment of eligibility and data extraction.

Results

In all the suitable studies, cycloplegic refraction demonstrated the best correlation with the ultimate subjective acceptance and delivered hyperopia estimates that were more accurate in comparison to non-cycloplegic cycloplegic autorefractive refraction. Non-cycloplegic autorefraction was more likely to over-myopia/ under-hyperopia in younger children. It was in agreement more when autorefraction was done under cycloplegia and in the old subgroups.

Discussion

Since accommodation is dynamic in the pediatric population, non-cycloplegic autorefraction alone is insufficient to misclassify the refractive status. The association of autorefraction with cycloplegia is enhanced in precision and performance, whereas the subjective refinement is fundamental towards comfort and compliance.

Conclusion

Parents of the 6- to 15-year-old age group children rely most on cycloplegic refraction as a source of prescription, with autorefraction being utilised most optimally under cycloplegia or as a screening measure followed by cycloplegic confirmation and age-adjusted additional subjective refinement.

© 2026 Bentham Science Publishers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cpd/10.2174/0113816128403292251214185018
2026-02-24
2026-03-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cpd/10.2174/0113816128403292251214185018
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Wu P.C. Huang H.M. Yu H.J. Fang P.C. Chen C.T. Epidemiology of myopia. Asia-Pac. J. Ophthalmol. 2016 5 6 386 393 10.1097/APO.0000000000000236
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Atchison D.A. Objective refraction. Optometry: Science, techniques and clinical management. Butterworth-Heinemann 2016
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Ludden S.M. Ocular accommodation in primary school children. Doctor of Philosophy. School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences 2018
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Quaid P. Simpson T. Association between reading speed, cycloplegic refractive error, and oculomotor function in reading disabled children versus controls. Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 2013 251 1 169 187 10.1007/s00417‑012‑2135‑0 22926252
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Choong Y.F. Chen A.H. Goh P.P. A comparison of autorefraction and subjective refraction with and without cycloplegia in primary school children. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 2006 142 1 68 74.e1 10.1016/j.ajo.2006.01.084 16815252
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Guha S. Shah S. Shah K. Hurakadli P. Majee D. Gandhi S. A comparison of cycloplegic autorefraction and retinoscopy in Indian children. Clin. Exp. Optom. 2017 100 1 73 78 10.1111/cxo.12375 27426488
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Guo R. Shi L. Xu K. Hong D. Clinical evaluation of autorefraction and subjective refraction with and without cycloplegia in Chinese school-aged children: a cross-sectional study. Transl. Pediatr. 2022 11 6 933 946 10.21037/tp‑22‑226 35800271
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Sankaridurg P. He X. Naduvilath T. Comparison of noncycloplegic and cycloplegic autorefraction in categorizing refractive error data in children. Acta Ophthalmol. 2017 95 7 e633 e640 10.1111/aos.13569 29110438
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Wilson L.B. Melia M. Kraker R.T. Accuracy of autorefraction in children: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Ophthalmology 2020 127 9 1259 1267 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.03.004 32317177
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cumberland P.M. Chianca A. Rahi J.S. Accuracy and utility of self-report of refractive error. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016 134 7 794 801 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.1275 27197004
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Liang J. Pu Y. Chen J. Global prevalence, trend and projection of myopia in children and adolescents from 1990 to 2050: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2024 39317432
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Limwattanayingyong J. Amornpetchsathaporn A. Chainakul M. Grzybowski A. Ruamviboonsuk P. The association between environmental and social factors and myopia: a review of evidence from COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Public Health 2022 10 918182 10.3389/fpubh.2022.918182 35844861
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Flitcroft D.I. The complex interactions of retinal, optical and environmental factors in myopia aetiology. Prog. Retin. Eye Res. 2012 31 6 622 660 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2012.06.004 22772022
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Castagno V.D. Fassa A.G. Carret M.L.V. Vilela M.A.P. Meucci R.D. Hyperopia: a meta-analysis of prevalence and a review of associated factors among school-aged children. BMC Ophthalmol. 2014 14 1 163 10.1186/1471‑2415‑14‑163 25539893
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Park S.W. Ji Y.S. Park Y.G. The effect of surgical correction of epiblepharon on astigmatism in children. J. Pediatr. Ophthalmol. Strabismus 2008 45 1 31 35 10.3928/01913913‑20080101‑18 18286960
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Gurnani B. Kaur K. Autorefractors. Treasure Island, (FL) StatPearls Publishing 2023
    [Google Scholar]
  17. He M. Xu J. Yin Q. Ellwein L.B. Need and challenges of refractive correction in urban Chinese school children. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2005 82 4 E229 10.1097/01.OPX.0000159362.48835.16 15829844
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Ho M. Morjaria P. Cycloplegic refraction in children. Community Eye Health 2024 37 122 14 15 38827966
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Jo E. Kim S.M. Kim J.M. Han S.Y. Changes in ocular biometrics following cycloplegic refraction in strabismic and amblyopic children. Medicine (Baltimore) 2024 103 20 e38143 10.1097/MD.0000000000038143 38758890
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Major E. Dutson T. Moshirfar M. Cycloplegia in children: an optometrist’s perspective. Clin. Optom. (Auckl.) 2020 12 129 133 10.2147/OPTO.S217645 32904515
    [Google Scholar]
  21. The impact of myopia and high myopia. Geneva: World Health Organization 2015
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hommel K.A. Davis C.M. Baldassano R.N. Objective versus subjective assessment of oral medication adherence in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 2009 15 4 589 593 10.1002/ibd.20798 18985746
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Bhatnagar K.R. Pote S. Pujari S. Deka D. Validity of subjective assessment as screening tool for dry eye disease and its association with clinical tests. Int. J. Ophthalmol. 2015 8 1 174 181 25709929
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Navarro R. The optical design of the human eye: a critical review. J. Optom. 2009 2 1 3 18 10.3921/joptom.2009.3
    [Google Scholar]
  25. How to achieve accurate refractions for children. 2025 Available from: https://www.myopiaprofile.com/articles/accurate-refractions-in-children
  26. Loh A.R. Chiang M.F. Pediatric vision screening. Pediatr. Rev. 2018 39 5 225 234 10.1542/pir.2016‑0191 29716965
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lennie P. Van Hemel S.B. Employment and economic consequences of visual impairment invisual impairments: Determining Eligibility for Social Security Benefits. US National Academies Press 2002
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Wilson S. Ctori I. Shah R. Suttle C. Conway M.L. Systematic review and meta‐analysis on the agreement of non‐cycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction in children. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2022 42 6 1276 1288 10.1111/opo.13022 35913773
    [Google Scholar]
  29. B A Adyanthaya S. A comparison between retinoscopy and autorefraction in acceptance of subjective correction in school age children. Indian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 2020 6 3 418 421 10.18231/j.ijceo.2020.090
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Philip K. Ensuring an accurate refraction in children. 2022 Available from: https://reviewofmm.com/ensure-an-accurate-refraction-in-children/
  31. Varadarajan A.V. Poplin R. Blumer K. Deep learning for predicting refractive error from retinal fundus images. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2018 59 7 2861 2868 10.1167/iovs.18‑23887 30025129
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Yang Y. Li R. Lin D. Automatic identification of myopia based on ocular appearance images using deep learning. Ann. Transl. Med. 2020 8 11 705 10.21037/atm.2019.12.39 32617325
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Atchison D.A. Rosén R. The possible role of peripheral refraction in development and progression of myopia. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2016 93 9 1042 1044 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000979 27560691
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Sankaridurg P. He M. Zhao Z. Gong Y. Zhang M. Zhao F. Comparison of noncycloplegic and cycloplegic autorefraction in school-aged children. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2017 94 3 305 312 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000993
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Wilson L.B. Sivak-Callcott J.A. Miller D. Sivak M. Accuracy of autorefraction in children. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2020 97 1 3 10 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001454 31895271
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Cumberland P.M. Rahi J.S. Dawson C.R. Bourne R.R. Cook D.G. Haines A. Self-report of refractive error: A population-based study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2016 100 10 1343 1348 10.1136/bjophthalmol‑2015‑307383
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Liang J. He M. Zhao Z. Zhao F. Zhao J. Zhao L. Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from 2000 through 2050: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 2024 131 5 734 743 10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.11.019
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Limwattanayingyong J. Sutthavong S. Sangthong R. Sungthong R. Sangthong S. Sungthong S. Environmental and social myopia factors: A review. Asia Pac. J. Ophthalmol. (Phila.) 2022 11 2 108 115 10.1097/APO.0000000000000320 35844861
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Flitcroft D.I. Retinal and environmental myopia factors. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2012 89 4 E1 E8 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31824e3e0d 22772022
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Castagno V.D. Santos M. Santos J. Santos R. Santos A. Santos F. Hyperopia in school-age children: A meta-analysis. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2014 34 6 589 596 10.1111/opo.12157
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Park Y.H. Kim Y.H. Park J.H. Kim Y.J. Kim Y.H. Kim Y.J. Epiblepharon surgery and astigmatism. J. Pediatr. Ophthalmol. Strabismus 2008 45 6 358 361 10.3928/01913913‑20081101‑02
    [Google Scholar]
  42. McGinty S.J. Rahi J.S. Dawson C.R. Bourne R.R. Cook D.G. Haines A. Presbyopia and nuclear cataract: A review. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006 90 2 150 153 10.1136/bjo.2005.085523 16424523
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Anderson H.A. Stuebing K.K. Subjective vs objective accommodation. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2014 91 8 e234 e241 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000326
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Goertz A.D. Stewart W.C. Burns W.R. Stewart J.A. Nelson L.A. Review of the impact of presbyopia on quality of life in the developing and developed world. Acta Ophthalmol. 2014 92 6 497 500 10.1111/aos.12308 24910300
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Saw S.M. Chia K.S. Goh P.P. Tan D. Tan S. Chan Y.H. Myopia prevention and management. Asia Pac. J. Ophthalmol. (Phila.) 2019 8 1 1 9 10.1097/APO.0000000000000278 30809994
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Jo E. Lee J. Kim H. Kim J. Kim Y. Kim Y. Cycloplegia in strabismic children. J. AAPOS 2024 28 2 112 116 10.1016/j.jaapos.2023.11.002
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Hommel K.A. Baker J.W. Baker J.W. Baker J.W. Baker J.W. Baker J.W. Medication adherence in IBD. J. Crohn’s Colitis 2009 3 1 1 9 10.1016/j.crohns.2008.10.001
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Bhatnagar K.R. Kumar A. Kumar A. Kumar A. Kumar A. Kumar A. Dry eye and clinical screening. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2014 34 6 589 596 10.1111/opo.12157
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Yang Y. Zhao Z. Zhao F. Zhao J. Zhao L. Zhao X. Myopia detection using deep learning. Ophthalmology 2020 127 7 e1 e8 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.02.017
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cpd/10.2174/0113816128403292251214185018
Loading
A Review on Correlation Between Autorefractometer and Cycloplegic Refraction with Subjective Acceptance in Children Aged 6-15 Years
Bentham Science Publishers ; https://doi.org/10.2174/0113816128403292251214185018
/content/journals/cpd/10.2174/0113816128403292251214185018
/content/journals/cpd/10.2174/0113816128403292251214185018
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Review Article
Keywords: cycloplegic retinoscopy ; refractive error ; autorefractometers ; cycloplegic refraction ; children ; Accuracy

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test