ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2024
Eye Adult Changes in Thought (Eye ACT) Study: Design and Report on the Inaugural Cohort.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2024. 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.
- A Data-driven Age-related Macular Degeneration Severity Scoring System Leveraging the AREDS Studies and Clinical Electronic Medical Records.Ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Age-related macular degeneration severity and risk of Alzheimer's disease in older adults in a prospective, community-based cohort study.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Conflicting research on retinal biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (AD/ADRD) is likely related to limited sample sizes, study design, and protocol differences. Objective: The prospective Eye Adult Changes in Thought (Eye ACT) seeks to address these gaps. Methods: Eye ACT participants are recruited from ACT, an ongoing cohort of dementia-free, older adults followed biennially until AD/ADRD, and undergo visual function and retinal imaging assessment either in clinic or at home. Results: 330 participants were recruited as of 03/2023. Compared to ACT participants not in Eye ACT (N = 1868), Eye ACT participants (N = 330) are younger (mean age: 70.3 versus 71.2, p = 0.014), newer to ACT (median ACT visits since baseline: 3 versus 4, p < 0.001), have more years of education (17.7 versus 16.2, p < 0.001) and had lower rates of visual impairment (12% versus 22%, p < 0.001). Compared to those seen in clinic (N = 300), Eye ACT participants seen at home (N = 30) are older (77.2 versus 74.9, p = 0.015), more frequently female (60% versus 49%, p = 0.026), and have significantly worse visual acuity (71.1 versus 78.9 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters, p < 0.001) and contrast sensitivity (-1.9 versus -2.1 mean log units at 3 cycles per degree, p = 0.002). Cognitive scores and retinal imaging measurements are similar between the two groups. Conclusions: Participants assessed at home had significantly worse visual function than those seen in clinic. By including these participants, Eye ACT provides a unique longitudinal cohort for evaluating potential retinal biomarkers of dementia.
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.