ArticleEye (London, England)2024
Characterization and prevalence of ocular comorbidities and risk of legal blindness across the United States.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Demography, clinical profile and risk of retinal vein occlusion among patients with age-related macular degeneration - a tertiary hospital based study.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Aqueous Humor Proteome in RVO-Associated Macular Edema: Analysis during Three Consecutive Conbercept Treatments.ACS omega · 2025Article
- The potential role of adipokines and hepatokines in age-related ocular diseases.Metabolism open · 2025Review
- Comment on 'Characterization and prevalence of ocular comorbidities and risk of legal blindness across the United States'.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- Response to 'comment on 'characterization and prevalence of ocular comorbidities and risk of legal blindness across the United States''.Eye (London, England) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesVision loss is a top disability in the United States (US). Patients commonly present with multiple ocular diseases, but the extent to which this places them at risk for vision loss, and if sex and race impacts this, is poorly understood. This exploratory analysis evaluated which ocular comorbidities and demographics are at highest risk for visual impairment. SUBJECTS/
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted through the TriNetX Analytics Network, an aggregated network encompassing over 90 million insured and uninsured patients across 50 healthcare organizations from all regions in the US. Patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR), age-related macular degeneration (AMD), retinal vein occlusion (RVO), glaucoma, and uveitis were included in this study. Ocular diseases and visual impairment were determined through ICD-10 codes. Prevalence and odds ratios were calculated while stratifying by sex and racial demographics. Statistical analyses were completed using RStudio and Excel with 95% confidence intervals calculated.
resultsThe comorbid conditions with the highest prevalence of visual impairment were uveitis and RVO (39.94%), uveitis and neovascular AMD (37.61%), and uveitis and glaucoma (33.23%). The comorbidity with the highest odds for visual impairment was uveitis and RVO (POR 4.86; 95% CI 4.49, 5.26). Compared to white males, Black and Hispanic males were disproportionately affected by visual impairment across ocular comorbidities.
conclusionThis study quantified the prevalence and odds of visual impairment for unilateral and comorbid ocular disease, with the addition of uveitis causing the greatest increase. Black and Hispanic males were disproportionately affected by visual impairment across comorbid conditions.
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.