May 4, 2026
By Kevin Chan, OD, MS, FAAO, IACMM
Photo Credit: Dreamstime Photos
In the current digital era, instant gratification has become a new ingredient for how we process information. Creating catchy headlines or so-called “breaking news” has been so widespread that readers are often primed to develop visceral or knee-jerk reactions towards certain subject matters.
In fact, an analysis of 1.67 million Facebook posts found that nearly 65% of people have been exposed to clickbait headlines. More shockingly, 97.5% of them admitted that they had been compelled to click into those attention-grabbing headlines.1,2 Have you? Admittedly, I have. The tactics of clickbait have been so pervasive and masterfully done that readers, particularly Gen Z and Millennials, are accustomed to fully supporting or believing in what is portrayed simply from a two-second glance of the headlines alone.
Is Healthcare Subject to Clickbait Too?
The realm of healthcare has also been significantly impacted by the culture of clickbait. Patients are often influenced by what they see on social media, which has slowly persuaded and indirectly eroded the rapport and trust with practitioners.3 If practitioners aren’t savvy enough, they can easily be swayed or gaslighted.
As I read the recent headline of an article titled, “Orthokeratology lenses linked to ocular health risks in study,” published in the American Optometric Association (AOA) News Digest in April, it piqued my curiosity and skepticism on how orthokeratology has been portrayed or perceived in the mainstream of eye care. As an eye care practitioner and medical editor who focuses on treating patients with specialty contact lenses like OrthoK, I could hardly turn my attention away from this headline. The perceived notion isn’t about the safety of OrthoK itself, which has been studied extensively with a high safety profile and efficacy.6,9 What is more concerning to me, however, is the suggested generalization and plausible causation (which isn’t validated or proven) between OrthoK lens wear and ocular health risks.
While the summary has quoted the original (older) study—which was actually published in August last year and was reposted several times on other media platforms like Healio—the news headline has fueled skepticism and misleading understanding on the already-undermined and poorly perceived subject of OrthoK, and how it benefits patients of all ages–particularly among pediatric populations. Without proper context and thorough analysis of the original paper, it can easily lead to faulty understanding and application of OrthoK in primary eye care settings.
Demystifying the Article
To give readers an unfiltered, inside-scoop of the original study by Dang et al.,4 let’s begin with the title “Effects of wearing orthokeratology lenses for more than 5 years on the ocular surface of adolescents.” How much of a difference do you see in the original title of the study compared to the more sensational headline? To me, the differences are vast and disappointing. Nowhere did the original title mention the sequelae of OrthoK as “ocular health risks.” In fact, the stance of the original research was supposedly more neutral and unbiased.
To suggest that “OrthoK can link to ocular risks” was never intended in this context, however. Meanwhile, the study has specifically addressed risk factors or rare complications associated with OrthoK lens wear, such as microbial keratitis or corneal staining, which are the known concerns for ANY type of contact lens modality. However, these risks are typically mitigated through proper patient selection, education and follow-up care. Under astute and appropriate management, OrthoK remains a safe and effective treatment modality for vision correction and myopia control for children, with relatively low complication rates comparable to other contact lens modalities. The benefits of OrthoK have evidently outweighed the potential or perceived risks of OrthoK, as reported for over the past two decades.6-9
As far as the core message learned from the original study, the authors reported that adolescents wearing OrthoK for more than five years had “lower average non-invasive tear break-up time, thinner tear film lipid layers and higher rates of lower meibomian gland loss (MGL) compared to the control group.” This is considered consistent with other types of contact lenses. More importantly, this study was not originally intended to be risk-based, but more of the association, not causation, of OrthoK wearers and potential ocular manifestations. Unfortunately, the headline used in other news media has deceptively misconstrued the intended aim and outcomes of the study, which specifically discussed key qualifiers, such as the relative frequency of adverse events, patient compliance factors and long-term benefits of OrthoK. Association is never intended to equate to causation.
The Perils of Oversimplification
While the reported headline has certainly turned readers’ heads, the oversimplification isn’t simply about semantics. It can be particularly perilous and costly for practitioners and patients who are not experienced or well-versed in the subject of orthokeratology. Without thorough understanding of the key metrics and parameters studied, a headline should be built to educate the benefits and risks in fair levels considerably. The current headline used, however, has seemingly and mistakenly portrayed a nail-in-the-coffin statement that OrthoK should be avoided at all costs in clinical settings. It is certainly untrue and could create undue hesitation or apprehension unnecessarily for patients and clinicians.
For balanced and bipartisan decision-making, it is exceptionally crucial for clinicians to look beyond the “clickbait” headline and critically review and appraise the original literature first. When and where was it first published? How was the study designed? Was it susceptible to any form of study biases? Indeed, solely relying on secondary sources of summaries or provoking headlines can ultimately sever authenticity or breach trust. Moreover, a more accurate and responsible representation should acknowledge both the risks and benefits, supported by critics of other “noises” that could potentially derail the conclusion of the study.
The practical merits of any research study should encourage you to ponder your clinical approach, not negate it. What is seemingly too sensational or too causational may not serve well for the scientific and moral ground after all. I implore clinicians to exercise the clinical “sixth sense” and uphold skepticism of the so-called “bombshell” news or headlines.
References
1 Alarfaj, F.K., Muqadas, A., Khan, H.U. et al. Clickbait detection in news headlines using RoBERTa-Large language model and deep embeddings. Sci Rep 16, 691 (2026).
2 Jung, A.-K., Stieglitz, S., Kissmer, T., Mirbabaie, M. & Kroll, T. Click me…! The influence of clickbait on user engagement in social media and the role of digital nudging. PLoS ONE 17(6), e0266743. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266743 (2022).
3 Deng ZY., Tang Y., Wu M., Zhang X. Investigating the effects of clickbait on user engagement in health communication: A mixed-method study, Information & Management, Volume 62, Issue 8, 2025, 104231, ISSN 0378-7206, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2025.104231.
4 Yang X, He X, Lyu Y, Wang WQ, Wan GM. Effects of wearing orthokeratology lenses for more than 5 years on the ocular surface of adolescents. Contact Lens and Anterior Eye, 2025; 49.
5 Nordin BA. Slowing Myopia Progression in Adolescents Using Orthokeratology: A Retrospective Chart Review. Cureus. 2025 Jun 30;17(6):e87073. doi: 10.7759/cureus.87073. PMID: 40600105; PMCID: PMC12208949.
6 Bullimore MA, Saunders KJ, Baraas RC, Berntsen DA, Chen Z, Chia AWL, Goto S, Jiang J, Lan W, Logan NS, Najjar RP, Polling JR, Read SA, Woodman-Pieterse EC, Széll N, Verkicharla PK, Wu PC, Zhu X, Loughman J, Nagra M, Phillips JR, Tran HDM, Vera-Diaz FA, Yam J, Liu YM, Singh SE, Wildsoet CF. IMI-Interventions for Controlling Myopia Onset and Progression 2025. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2025 Sep 2;66(12):39. doi: 10.1167/iovs.66.12.39. PMID: 40960225; PMCID: PMC12448128.
7 Kim J, Lim DH, Han SH, Chung TY. Predictive factors associated with axial length growth and myopia progression in orthokeratology. PLoS One. 2019 Jun 12;14:e0218140.
8 Cho P, Cheung SW, Edwards M. The longitudinal orthokeratology research in children (LORIC) in Hong Kong: a pilot study on refractive changes and myopic control. Curr Eye Res. 2005 Jan;30:71-80.
9 Sun Y, Xu F, Zhang T, Liu M, Wang D, Chen Y, Liu Q. Orthokeratology to control myopia progression: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015 Apr 9;10:e0124535.
Read more from our Co-Medical Editors here
