ArticlePloS one2022
Association between cognitive function and large optic nerve cupping, accounting for cup-disc-ratio genetic risk score.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- A deep-learning retinal aging biomarker for cognitive decline and incident dementia.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo investigate if accounting for a cup-to-disc ratio (CDR) genetic risk score (GRS) modified the association between large CDR and cognitive function among women.
designThis was a retrospective study using data from the Women's Health Initiative.
methodsPatients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension were excluded. Large CDR was defined as ≥ 0.6 in either eye. Cognitive function was measured by the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MSE). We used the combined effects from 13 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to formulate the GRS for CDR. We used logistic regression to investigate associations between weighted GRS and large CDR, then a linear regression to assess the association between weighted GRS and 3MSE scores, and between weighted GRS, CDR, and 3MSE scores, adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics.
resultsFinal analyses included 1,196 White women with mean age of 69.60 ± 3.62 years and 7.27% with large CDR. Mean GRS in women with and without large CDR was 1.51 ± 0.31 vs. 1.41 ± 0.36, respectively (p = 0.004). The odds of large CDR for a one unit increase in GRS was 2.30 (95% CI: (1.22, 4.36), p = 0.011). Adding the CDR GRS in the model with CDR and 3MSE, women with large CDR still had statistically significantly lower 3MSE scores than those without large CDR, yielding a predicted mean difference in 3MSE scores of 0.84 (p = 0.007).
conclusionsIndependent of the CDR GRS, women with large CDR had a lower cognitive function.
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.