ArticleOphthalmic epidemiology2021
Simple Vision Function Tests that Distinguish Eyes with Early to Intermediate Age-related Macular Degeneration.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preserved Contrast Sensitivity in Early and Intermediate Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Marked Loss in Late Stage: ALSTAR2.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Novel Handheld Device for Remote Monitoring of Dry Macular Degeneration and Patient Usability Assessment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Home vision monitoring in patients with maculopathy: current and future options for digital technologies.Eye (London, England) · 2023Review
- Comparing Rod-Mediated Dark Adaptation in Older Adults before and after Cataract Surgery.Current eye research · 2023Article
- Longitudinal Evaluation of Visual Function Impairments in Early and Intermediate Age-Related Macular Degeneration Patients.Ophthalmology science · 2022Article
- How Vision Is Impaired From Aging to Early and Intermediate Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Insights From ALSTAR2 Baseline.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo present and compare baseline vision findings in eyes with early age-related macular degeneration (E-AMD), intermediate AMD (I-AMD), and age-similar participants with normal aging changes to the retina (No-AMD).
methodsTwo hundred and thirty-seven eyes of 125 individuals (66.4% female, mean age 75.3 years) were tested monocularly using several simple, rapid psychophysical tests: high contrast visual acuity, low contrast visual acuity at reduced luminance, contrast sensitivity, shape discrimination hyperacuity, colour vision, reading rate, and glare recovery. Retinal status was determined using colour fundus photographs that were graded according to the Beckman Initiative for Macular Research Classification Committee scale. Logistic regression analyses with generalized estimating equations were used to assess the association between each vision variable and AMD category, while taking into account the correlation between the two eyes.
resultsThree vision measures (contrast sensitivity [CS], shape discrimination hyperacuity [SDH], and colour discrimination [DesatCCS]) were significantly and independently associated with intermediate AMD. Relative Risk Ratios (RRR), 95% Confidence Intervals (in parentheses), beta coefficients, and significance (p) for the I-AMD vs. No-AMD model are: CS: RRR = 6.5 (1.91-22.0), beta = 1.87,
conclusionsSimple screening tests distinguish eyes with intermediate AMD from eyes with less severe AMD or normal aging changes. This suggests that these vision measures may be significant predictors of which participants will go on to develop advanced AMD.
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.