ArticleEye (London, England)2026
Vision in the margins: the association between census tract neighbourhood disadvantage and visual difficulty and blindness in the United States.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesTo investigate the utility of using a census tract (CT) measure to assess neighbourhood disadvantage and to explore its effects on CT measures of visual difficulty and blindness (VDB). SUBJECTS/
methodsThis cross-sectional study used census tract data from the 2018 to 2022 American Community Survey and the National Neighbourhood Data Archive Neighbourhood Socioeconomic Status and Demographic Characteristics. CT measures of neighbourhood disadvantage, VDB, and demographics were summarized with descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation (SD)). The main outcome was the number of CTs residents reporting VDB and the association with neighbourhood disadvantage (an aggregate measure ranging from 0 to 1 with higher scores indicating more disadvantage) assessed using logistic regression.
resultsIn total, 83,388 CTs were included, with a mean of 2.53% of the population reporting VDB (SD = 2.62) and a mean neighbourhood disadvantage of 0.18 (SD = 0.12). Neighbourhood disadvantage was associated with 2.9% increased odds of VDB (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.029; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.029,1.029; p < 0.001), after adjusting for neighbourhood demographics including median age, percentage of the CT that were female sex, percentage of the CT that identified as a person of colour, population size of the CT, and the state in which the CT was located.
conclusionThis study identified that neighbourhood disadvantage was associated with a greater number of residents reporting VDB. Clinicians could use this measure to identify neighbourhoods with both higher levels of visual impairment and greater neighbourhood deprivation, allowing for targeted interventions that provide eye disease screening and eye care to those most at risk for poor vision outcomes.
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.