ArticleOphthalmic epidemiology2021
Generational Differences in the 10-year Incidence of Impaired Contrast Sensitivity.
Article in Ophthalmic epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Age-associated changes in electroretinography measures in companion dogs.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Long-term efficacy and safety of YAG laser vitreolysis for vision degrading myodesopsia.International journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo determine if incidence of contrast sensitivity (CS) impairment differs by generation and identify factors to explain these differences.
methodsThe Beaver Dam Eye Study (BDES) and Beaver Dam Offspring Study (BOSS) are cohort studies of aging adults in Beaver Dam, Wisconsin. Baseline examinations occurred from 1993 to 1995 (BDES) and 2005-2008 (BOSS). Follow-up examinations occurred in five-year intervals. CS testing was conducted with Pelli-Robson letter sensitivity charts; Incident impairment was a log CS score <1.55 in either eye at follow-up. Associations of incidence with generation were investigated using estimated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsParticipants (N = 3185) had a mean age of 51.9 years at baseline (standard deviation = 9.9) and 51.9% were female. Ten-year cumulative incidence of CS impairment was 40.1%, was higher among women (41.7%) than men (38.8%), and increased by age group. The risk of incident CS impairment decreased by 39% per generation. In multivariable models, the Baby Boom Generation (HR = 0.42, 95%CI = 0.31, 0.58) and Generation X (HR = 0.56, 95%CI = 0.34, 0.91) had a significantly decreased risk of CS impairment compared to the Greatest Generation. Results were similar in sensitivity analyses excluding those with cataract, age-related macular degeneration, or visual acuity impairment.
conclusionThe risk of incident CS impairment decreased by birth cohort, with the greatest reduction in the Baby Boom Generation. The difference in risk suggests that there are unknown modifiable risk factors that may help to further explain the etiology of CS impairment and provide potential pathways for prevention in the future.
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.