ArticleScientific reports2022
Dementia and risk of visual impairment in Chinese older adults.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal changes in sensory impairments and subsequent falls and fall-related injuries among middle-aged and older adults: a pooled analysis of four prospective cohorts.BMC public health · 2025Article
- A study on the relationship between recreational physical activity and audiovisual difficulty for older adults.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Association of cataract surgery with risk of dementia: a meta-analysis and systematic review of cohort studies with 720,075 participants.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We had previously identified visual impairment increasing risk of incident dementia. While a bi-directional vision-cognition association has subsequently been proposed, no study has specifically examined the longitudinal association between dementia and incidence of clinically defined visual impairment. In this territory-wide community cohort study of 10,806 visually unimpaired older adults, we examined their visual acuity annually for 6 years and tested if dementia at baseline was independently associated with higher risk of incident visual impairment (LogMAR ≥ 0.50 in the better eye despite best correction, which is equivalent to moderate visual impairment according to the World Health Organization definition). By the end of Year 6, a total of 3151 (29.2%) participants developed visual impairment. However, we did not find baseline dementia associating with higher risk of incident visual impairment, after controlling for baseline visual acuity, cataract, glaucoma, diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, heart diseases, stroke, Parkinson's disease, depression, hearing and physical impairments, physical, intellectual and social activities, diet, smoking, age, sex, educational level, and socioeconomic status. Among different covariables, baseline visual acuity appears to be more important than dementia in contributing to the development of visual impairment. Our present findings highlight the need for re-evaluating whether dementia is indeed a risk factor for visual impairment.
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.