Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42261516›Full record

ReviewCureus2026

Cognitive Assessment in Glaucoma Care: A Narrative Review of Clinical Rationale, Screening Tools, and Implementation Challenges.

Yuto Yoshida, Masaki Tanito

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yuto YoshidaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shimane University Faculty of Medicine, Izumo, JPN.
Masaki TanitoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shimane University Faculty of Medicine, Izumo, JPN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, increasing attention has been directed toward the association between glaucoma and cognitive impairment, with a growing number of reports highlighting their interrelationship. With the progression of population aging, the coexistence of these two conditions is expected to rise further. Cognitive impairment may influence glaucoma management in multiple ways, including difficulties in performing subjective examinations such as visual field testing, reduced adherence to topical medications, and an elevated risk of postoperative complications. Consequently, integrating cognitive assessment into glaucoma care may be particularly relevant in selected patient populations, such as older adults or those with suspected adherence or reliability issues. This narrative review aims to summarize the current evidence on the relationship between glaucoma and cognitive impairment and to provide an overview of commonly used cognitive screening tools. In addition, we discuss the clinical implications of cognitive dysfunction in glaucoma management and highlight emerging digital approaches for cognitive assessment. Given that much of the available evidence is observational and that glaucoma-specific validation of cognitive screening strategies remains limited, this review provides insights into optimizing glaucoma care in an aging society and outlines directions for future research.

Indexed as

alzheimer’s dementiadementia careglaucoma practiceglaucoma therapyjapanese geriatrics

Identifiers

PMID42261516
PMCPMC13242598

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.