ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2017
Generational Differences in the 5-Year Incidence of Age-Related Macular Degeneration.
Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Balance Disorders in Young and Middle-Aged Adults: NHANES, 2001-2004 and 2021-2023.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Generational Differences in Audiometric and Self-Reported Hearing and Hearing Aid Use.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Article
- Intravitreal injections: past trends and future projections within a UK tertiary hospital.Eye (London, England) · 2022Article
- The Relationship between Statin and Risk of Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of ophthalmology · 2022Review
- Potential of Long Non-Coding RNAs in Age-Related Macular Degeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Age-related macular degeneration.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2021Review
- Generational Differences in the 10-year Incidence of Impaired Contrast Sensitivity.Ophthalmic epidemiology · 2021Article
- Age-Related Macular Degeneration: What Do We Know So Far?Acta medica Lituanic · 2021Review
- Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Epidemiology and Clinical Aspects.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2021Article
- Study the past if you would define the future (Confucius).The British journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Establishing a three-generation prospective study: Bogalusa daughters.Journal of developmental origins of health and disease · 2020Article
- Article
- Incidence of and Risk Factors Associated With Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Four-Year Follow-up From the ALIENOR Study.JAMA ophthalmology · 2018Article
- Investigating the modulation of genetic effects on late AMD by age and sex: Lessons learned and two additional loci.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Whether a reported decline in the risk of developing age-related macular degeneration (AMD) continued for people born during the Baby Boom years (1946-1964) or later is unknown. These data are important to plan for ocular health care needs in the 21st century. Objectives: To determine whether the 5-year risk for AMD declined by generation and to identify factors that contributed to improvement in risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: Data came from the longitudinal cohort Beaver Dam Eye Study (March 1, 1988, through September 15, 1990, and March 1, 1993, through June 15, 1995) and the Beaver Dam Offspring Study (June 8, 2005, through August 4, 2008, and July 12, 2010, through March 21, 2013). These population-based studies examined residents of Beaver Dam, Wisconsin, aged 43 to 84 years in 1987 through 1988 and their adult offspring aged 21 to 84 years in 2005 through 2008. A total of 4819 participants were at risk for developing AMD based on fundus images obtained at baseline visits. Data were analyzed from February 18, 2016, through June 22, 2017, with additional analyses ending September 22, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Fundus images were graded for AMD using the Wisconsin Age-related Maculopathy Grading System. The incidence of AMD was defined as the presence at the 5-year follow-up examination of pure geographic atrophy or exudative macular degeneration, any type of drusen with pigmentary abnormalities, or soft indistinct drusen without pigmentary abnormalities. Results: Among the 4819 participants, the mean (SD) baseline age of the cohort was 54 (11) years; 2117 were men (43.9%) and 2702 were women (56.1%). The 5-year age- and sex-adjusted incidence of AMD was 8.8% in the Greatest Generation (born during 1901-1924), 3.0% in the Silent Generation (born during 1925-1945), 1.0% in the Baby Boom Generation (born during 1946-1964), and 0.3% in Generation X (born during 1965-1984). Adjusting for age and sex, each generation was more than 60% less likely to develop AMD than the previous generation (relative risk, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.24-0.46). The generational association (relative risk, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.57) remained significant after adjusting for age, sex, smoking, educational attainment, exercise, levels of non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, statins, and multivitamins. Conclusions and Relevance: The 5-year risk for AMD declined by birth cohorts throughout the 20th century. Factors that explain this decline in risk are not known. However, this pattern is consistent with reported declines in risks for cardiovascular disease and dementia, suggesting that aging Baby Boomers may experience better retinal health at older ages than did previous generations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.