Background: The benefits of occlusion treatment for amblyopia are well established. True compliance can be difficult to assess and is usually based on patient history. We hypothesize that more visits to the physician provides more chances to improve compliance. Methods: We conducted a prospective, comparative, blind trial in which 30 children with amblyopia were randomly assigned to be followed up more frequently (every 4 to 6 weeks) (study group) or as established on our standard regular basis (X month intervals, based on X, age in years) (control group). The primary outcome was to study differences in treatment compliance between these groups. The secondary outcome was to report compliance in a group of Chilean children and to compare survey results with adherence, to assess concordance between them. Results: Baseline clinical characteristics were similar in the two groups. 30 patients were recruited. Mean compliance for all patients was 82% ±25. Study group compliance was 83% ±27 versus 76% ±26 in control group (p = 0.5). Without epidemiology "intention to treat analysis" (ITT), study group compliance was 97% ±3.9 compared to 76% ±26 in control group (p = 0.049). Pearson correlation between negative responses to a parental survey after treatment, of the percentage of adherence and compliance, was -0.57 and statistically significant (p = 0.013). Conclusions: There were no differences in patient compliance comparing more frequent evaluation versus a follow up evaluation based in an age according scheme. There is a high compliance to occlusion therapy in this group of Chilean children. If parents reported more negative adherence aspects in the survey, the worse the compliance.