Introduction Myopia is a worldwide epidemic. Plethora of treatments are offered to decrease myopia progression. In this study, we compared between different geographical areas worldwide the practice patterns used by paediatric ophthalmologists to decrease the progression of myopia. Methods Global responses to a questionnaire were analysed (n=794) for demographic variations. Pharmacological, optical and behavioural categories were defined as effective or ineffective based on the current scientific peer reviewed literature. Results Treatment rates varied significantly between geographical regions (mean 57%, range 39%–89%, p<0.001). Nearly all participants who treat myopia used at least one form of effective treatment, regardless of location (98%, p=0.16). Among those prescribing pharmacological treatments, European physicians offered the lowest rate of effective treatment compared with other regions (85% vs mean 97%). Rates of effective optical treatment varied significantly between locations (p<0.001), from 16% (Central-South America) to 56% (Far East). Most treating respondents advocated behavioural modifications (92%), between 87% (North America) and 100% (Central Asia). Nearly all respondents used combinations of treatment modalities (95%)—mostly pharmacological, optical and behavioural combination. However, combination rates varied significantly between regions (p<0.001). Discussion The utility of treatment to decrease myopia progression differs significantly across the world both in type, combination and efficacy. Conclusion Paediatric ophthalmologists involvement and proficiency in myopia progression treatment varies around the world. This may entail promoting continuous medical education and other incentives to increase the number and proficiency of paediatric ophthalmologist to have a more effective impact to control the myopia epidemic in children.

Purpose: To assess attitudes towards predictive testing for autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa (ADRP). Methods: A prospective questionnaire study of 46 affected adults and their adult family members identified from pedigrees clearly consistent with ADRP or who had had DNA-testing confirmation of ADRP before the study commenced. Results: High proportions of unaffected siblings (73%) and patients (67%) agreed to prenatal testing. Patients agreed to prenatal testing. Patients agreed significantly more often than unaffected siblings that treatment should be available prior to initiating predictive testing. Psychoemotional distress was reported in 57% of the affected adults and their family members in recollecting their own predictive testing as children. Conclusions: ADRP families indicate a favorable attitude towards testing presymptomatic children with counseling to lessen the psychological and social impact of results.