CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,616Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesGlaucoma and retinal disordersRetinal Diseases and Treatments

Causes and Prevalence of Visual Impairment Among Adults in the UnitedStates

Open access
The Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group*·2004·Archives of Ophthalmology
DOI 10.1001/archopht.122.4.477
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cause-specific prevalence and distribution of blindness and low vision in the United States by age, race/ethnicity, and gender, and to estimate the change in these prevalence figures over the next 20 years. METHODS: Summary prevalence estimates of blindness (both according to the US definition of < or =6/60 [< or =20/200] best-corrected visual acuity in the better-seeing eye and the World Health Organization standard of < 6/120 [< 20/400]) and low vision (< 6/12 [< 20/40] best-corrected vision in the better-seeing eye) were prepared separately for black, Hispanic, and white persons in 5-year age intervals starting at 40 years. The estimated prevalences were based on recent population-based studies in the United States, Australia, and Europe. These estimates were applied to 2000 US Census data, and to projected US population figures for 2020, to estimate the number of Americans with visual impairment. Cause-specific prevalences of blindness and low vision were also estimated for the different racial/ethnic groups. RESULTS: Based on demographics from the 2000 US Census, an estimated 937 000 (0.78%) Americans older than 40 years were blind (US definition). An additional 2.4 million Americans (1.98%) had low vision. The leading cause of blindness among white persons was age-related macular degeneration (54.4% of the cases), while among black persons, cataract and glaucoma accounted for more than 60% of blindness. Cataract was the leading cause of low vision, responsible for approximately 50% of bilateral vision worse than 6/12 (20/40) among white, black, and Hispanic persons. The number of blind persons in the US is projected to increase by 70% to 1.6 million by 2020, with a similar rise projected for low vision. CONCLUSIONS: Blindness or low vision affects approximately 1 in 28 Americans older than 40 years. The specific causes of visual impairment, and especially blindness, vary greatly by race/ethnicity. The prevalence of visual disabilities will increase markedly during the next 20 years, owing largely to the aging of the US population.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This pooled analysis estimates that in 2000, 937,000 Americans older than 40 years were blind by the US definition and an additional 2.4 million had low vision, with prevalence projected to rise substantially by 2020. Causes varied by race/ethnicity: age-related macular degeneration led among white persons, while cataract and glaucoma accounted for most blindness among black persons.

Key findings

  • In 2000, an estimated 937,000 Americans older than 40 years were blind by the US definition (0.78%; 95% CI, 0.63%-0.94%), and 2.4 million had low vision (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.74%-2.21%), totaling 3.3 million visually impaired Americans (2.76%; 95% CI, 2.48%-3.04%).
  • The leading cause of blindness among white persons was age-related macular degeneration (54.4% of cases); among black persons, cataract and open-angle glaucoma accounted for slightly over 60% of cases; among Hispanic persons, open-angle glaucoma was the most common cause (28.6%), based on 4 bilaterally blind persons from glaucoma.
  • Cataract was the leading cause of low vision, responsible for approximately 50% of bilateral vision worse than 6/12 (20/40) among white, black, and Hispanic persons.
  • The number of blind persons older than 40 years was projected to increase by approximately 70% to 1.6 million (prevalence 1.1%) by 2020; low vision was projected at 3.9 million (2.5%), for a total of 5.5 million visually impaired Americans (3.6%).

Methods

  • Population-based studies of blindness and low vision conducted in North America, Western Europe, and Australia, published in English after 1990 and up to May 2001, were included; data were standardized for blindness definitions (WHO <6/120 [<20/400]; US ≤6/60 [≤20/200]) and low vision (<6/12 [<20/40] best-corrected vision in the better-seeing eye).
  • Age-, race/ethnicity-, and gender-specific prevalences were pooled using minimum variance linear estimation and logistic regression models fit separately for black, white, and Hispanic persons.
  • Modeled prevalences were applied to 2000 US Census data and to 2020 census projections, assuming constant age- and race/ethnicity-specific prevalences over the period.

Limitations

  • The paper states that estimates for white persons rely partly on data from Australia and Europe, where clinical and surgical practices and access to care may differ from the United States; Hispanic estimates are based on a single study of persons of Mexican descent; and black estimates are based on only 2 studies from the same state.
  • The paper states that diagnostic criteria for causes of blindness and low vision differed among studies, and that estimates are based on best-corrected visual acuity, so they do not reflect visual impairment due to uncorrected refractive error; if Melbourne Visual Impairment Project estimates applied, the true number of visually impaired Americans might be as high as 8 million.
  • Evident from the text: cause-specific estimates for Hispanic blindness are based on very few cases (e.g., 4 persons blind from glaucoma), and the 2020 projections assume constant age- and race/ethnicity-specific prevalences.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archopht.122.4.477

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 26 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingreasoning

    Blindness or low vision affects approximately 1 in 28 Americans older than 40 years.

    “Blindness or low vision affects approximately 1 in 28 Americans older than 40 years.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There was a high degree of similarity in age-specific blindness prevalence among the 6 studies of European-derived individuals on which the study estimates are based.

    “It is reassuring to note the high degree of similarity in agespecific blindness prevalence among the 6 studies of European-derived individuals on which our study estimates are based (Figure 1A).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingcitation

    The authors' estimates of the number of Americans with visual impairment are slightly lower than those reported in NHANES I-A, which reported 7.7% of African American and 4.1% of non-Hispanic white subjects with binocular visual acuities of 6/15 (20/50) or worse.

    “Our estimates of the number of Americans with visual impairment are slightly lower than those given in NHANES I-A (NHANES Augmentation Study I), which re-ported that 7.7% of African American and 4.1% of non-Hispanic white subjects had binocular visual acuities of 6/15 (20/50) or worse.19”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [19]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingown data

    Age-specific blindness prevalence was higher for black persons compared with white persons (OR=2.77; 95% CI, 1.56-4.92).

    “Age-specific blindness prevalence was higher for black persons compared with white persons (odds ratio [OR] = 2.77; 95% CI, 1.56-4.92)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The proportion of low vision due to cataract was more than twice the proportion due to any other condition.

    “This was more than twice the proportion of any other condition (Figure 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 16
  • May combine two claims. 24

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Estimated blindness by WHO standard among Australians older than 40 years in 2000 was 35,000 (0.4%).

    “blindness (WHO standard of Ͻ6/120 [Ͻ20/400] best-corrected visual acuity in the better-seeing eye) 35 000 (0.4%)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Based on the 2000 US Census, an estimated 937,000 Americans older than 40 years were blind by the US definition, a prevalence of 0.78% (95% CI, 0.63%-0.94%).

    “Based on demographics from the 2000 US Census, an estimated 937000 (0.78%) Americans older than 40 years were blind (US definition).”
    • Also stated in: § RESULTS · hedged
      “In 2000, there were an estimated 937000 blind Americans who were older than 40 years (US definition), a prevalence of 0.78% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63%-0.94%).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Overall, blindness was significantly (P=.004) more common in white women than white men, but the difference was no longer significant after adjustment for age (P>.10).

    “Overall, blindness was significantly (P=.004) more common in white women than white men, but the difference was no longer significant after adjustment for age (PϾ.10).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    An estimated additional 2.4 million Americans older than 40 years had low vision, a prevalence of 1.98% (95% CI, 1.74%-2.21%).

    “An additional 2.4 million Americans (1.98%) had low vision.”
    • Also stated in: § RESULTS · hedged
      “The number of persons with low vision was estimated to be an additional 2.4 million (1.98%; 95% CI, 1.74%-2.21%)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The Baltimore Eye Survey is at the lowest end of the range of low vision prevalence, and the Beaver Dam Eye Study toward the highest end; both are American studies.

    “However, the Baltimore Eye Survey, Baltimore, Md, is at the lowest end of this range, and the Beaver Dam Eye Study toward the highest end (Figure 1C); these are both American studies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Both low vision and blindness increased significantly with age for all races/ethnicities (P<.001 for both).

    “Both low vision and blindness increased significantly with age for all races/ethnicities (PϽ.001 for all races/ethnicities for both blindness and low vision) (Table 3).”
    • Also stated in: § COMMENT · boosted
      “Our results were consistent with those of the participating studies in demonstrating that the prevalence of visual impairment increases with increasing age.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Among Hispanic persons, open-angle glaucoma was the most common cause of blindness, accounting for 28.6% of cases, based on 4 persons bilaterally blind from glaucoma.

    “Among Hispanic persons, OAG was the most common cause of blindness (28.6% of the cases), although this is based on a total of only 4 persons bilaterally blind from glaucoma.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The age-adjusted prevalence of low vision was significantly higher for women among white persons (P=.01) but did not differ significantly by gender among black (P=.96) or Hispanic persons (P=.11).

    “The age-adjusted prevalence of low vision was significantly higher for women among white persons (P=.01) but did not differ significantly by gender among black (P=.96) or Hispanic persons (P=.11).”
    • Also stated in: § COMMENT · hedged
      “White women did appear to be at an increased risk of low vision in the current study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The leading cause of blindness among white Americans in 2000 was age-related macular degeneration, accounting for 54% of all blindness.

    “The leading cause of blindness among white persons was age-related macular degeneration (54.4% of the cases)”
    • Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
      “accounting for 54% of all blindness, as opposed to 9% for cataract, the next most common cause”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Prevalence of visual impairment in the British sample (WHO low vision standard <6/18) was 3.1% for persons aged 65 through 74 years, as opposed to 1.47% for Americans aged 65 through 69 years, and 2.61% for those aged 70 through 74 years.

    “Prevalence of visual impairment in the British sample (WHO low vision standard Ͻ6/18 [20/60]) was 3.1% for persons aged 65 through 74 years, as opposed to 1.47% for Americans aged 65 through 69 years, and 2.61% for those aged 70 through 74 years.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [20]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    Estimated blindness by US definition in Western Europe in 2000 was 1.38 million (0.7%).

    “blindness (US definition); 1.38 million (0.7%)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    Estimated low vision prevalence in Western Europe in 2000 was 3.64 million (2.0%).

    “low vision, 3.64 million (2.0%)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    Estimated low vision prevalence among Australians older than 40 years in 2000 was 143,000 (1.8%).

    “low vision 143 000 (1.8%)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Men had a significantly higher age-adjusted prevalence of blindness than women among black persons (P=.002), but not among white (P=.20) or Hispanic persons (P=.64).

    “Men had a significantly higher age-adjusted prevalence of blindness than women among black persons (P=.002), but not among white (P=.20) or Hispanic persons (P=.64).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    Estimated blindness by WHO standard in Western Europe in 2000 was 879,000 (0.5%).

    “blindness (WHO standard), 879000 (0.5%)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    The proportion of persons older than 65 years with blindness and low vision in the United States seems to be somewhat lower than that reported among a population-based sample of similar-aged British persons.

    “The proportion of persons older than 65 years with blindness and low vision in the United States seems to be somewhat lower than that reported among a population-based sample of similar-aged British persons.20”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [20]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Persons aged 80 years and older made up only 7.7% of the population in our study but accounted for 69% of observed blindness.

    “Persons aged 80 years and older made up only 7.7% of the population in our study but accounted for 69% of observed blindness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The NHANES I-A results are for presenting rather than best-corrected visual acuity, and they included only persons aged 25 to 74 years.

    “However, the NHANES I-A results are for presenting rather than best-corrected visual acuity as in our analysis, and they included only persons aged 25 to 74 years.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [19]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Blindness prevalence rises rapidly among the oldest segment of the population beyond 85 years, suggested by a highly significant quadratic term and a rapid apparent increase in estimated prevalence above age 85.

    “Although limited data did not permit us to make robust estimates in the age range beyond 85 years, a highly significant quadratic term in our models, together with a rapid apparent increase in estimated blindness prevalence above the age of 85 years, suggests that blindness prevalence rises rapidly among the oldest segment of the population.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Age-related macular degeneration has been reported to be the leading cause of blindness in most recent population-based studies of persons of European descent.

    “Age-related macular degeneration has been reported to be the leading cause of blindness in most recent population-based studies of persons of European descent.[6][7][8][15][16][17]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [6][7][8][15][16][17]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Diseases of aging are the most common causes of blindness (AMD, cataract, and glaucoma) and of low vision (cataract).

    “Diseases of aging are also the most common causes of blindness (AMD, cataract, and glaucoma) and of low vision (cataract).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The higher risk of diabetic retinopathy among black persons with diabetes may be because of a combination of factors, including higher prevalence of hyperglycemia and hypertension, poor access to medical care, and reduced health literacy among black compared with white persons.

    “This may be because of a combination of factors, including higher prevalence of hyperglycemia and hypertension, poor access to medical care, and reduced health literacy among black compared with white persons.28”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [28]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    NHANES vision data were collected more than 30 years ago.

    “In addition, these data were collected more than 30 years ago.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    NHANES has collected national data on vision disabilities, but the lack of photographic documentation of ocular conditions limits the ability to assess causal associations.

    “While The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) has collected national data on vision disabilities, 4 the lack of photographic documentation of ocular conditions limits the ability to assess causal associations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [4]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Visual impairment is highly prevalent in the United States and is projected to increase rapidly as the population ages.

    “Visual impairment is highly prevalent in the United States and is projected to increase rapidly as the population ages.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Constant age- and race/ethnicity-specific prevalences for blindness and low vision were assumed over the period from 2000 to 2020.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The prevalence of visual disabilities will increase markedly during the next 20 years, owing largely to the aging of the US population.

    “The prevalence of visual disabilities will increase markedly during the next 20 years, owing largely to the aging of the US population.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Constant age- and race/ethnicity-specific prevalences for blindness and low vision were assumed over the period from 2000 to 2020.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    In the case of Hispanic persons, estimates are based on data from a single study of persons of Mexican descent, which are likely to be influenced by local factors such as number, distribution, and practice patterns of ophthalmologists.

    “In the case of Hispanic persons, an important and rapidly growing segment of the US population, estimates are based on data from a single study of persons of Mexican descent, 9 which are likely to be influenced by local factors such as number, distribution, and practice patterns of ophthalmologists.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [9]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Most of this blindness could be reversed with treatment or avoided by preventive efforts.

    “Most of this blindness could be reversed with treatment or avoided by preventive efforts.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Diagnostic criteria for the various causes of blindness and low vision also differed among studies.

    “Diagnostic criteria for the various causes of blindness and low vision also differed among studies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The estimates reported here are based on best-corrected visual acuity and do not reflect the burden of low vision and blindness due to uncorrected refractive error.

    “Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the estimates reported here are based on best-corrected visual acuity.These figures do not reflect the burden of low vision and blindness due to uncorrected refractive error, potentially an important cause of visual impairment in the United States.36,37”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [36]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [37]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    If such estimates may accurately be applied in the United States, the true number of visually impaired Americans might be as high as 8 million.

    “If such estimates may accurately be applied in the United States, the true number of visually impaired Americans might be as high as 8 million.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The estimates from the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project (almost 60% of visual impairment due to uncorrected refractive error) may accurately be applied in the United States.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    These estimates of low vision and blindness prevalence among the US population are the first to take full advantage of the large number of population-based studies of vision carried out in the last decade.

    “Nevertheless, these estimates of low vision and blindness prevalence among the US population are the first to take full advantage of the large number of populationbased studies of vision carried out in the last decade.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Thus, the results of the current study provide useful estimates of the burden of visual impairment in the United States, its distribution by age, race/ethnicity, and sex, and its likely rapid future increase.

    “Thus, the results of the current study provide useful estimates of the burden of visual impairment in the United States, its distribution by age, race/ethnicity, and sex, and its likely rapid future increase.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The estimates were derived from raw data provided directly by the study groups and were combined only after agreement had been reached on standard presentation of data.

    “The estimates were derived from raw data provided directly by the study groups and were combined only after agreement had been reached on standard presentation of data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    These factors might be expected to influence the prevalence and cause-specific distribution of visual impairment.

    “These factors might be expected to influence the prevalence and causespecific distribution of visual impairment.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    A recent report from the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project suggests that almost 60% of visual impairment may be due to uncorrected refractive error.

    “A recent report from the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project 17 suggests that almost 60% of visual impairment may be due to uncorrected refractive error.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [17]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A recent review has cited differences in the definition of low vision and the age range of the oldest age category as the 2 most important sources of disagreement in estimates of visual impairment between studies.

    “A recent review has cited differences in the definition of low vision and the age range of the oldest age category as the 2 most important sources of disagreement in estimates of visual impairment between studies.38”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [38]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Estimates for black persons are based on data from only 2 studies, both from the same state, and may be similarly unstable.

    “Estimates for black persons are based on data from only 2 studies, 7,8 both from the same state, and may be similarly unstable.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [7]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [8]

      Not checked in the free run.

38 of 38

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Constant age- and race/ethnicity-specific prevalences for blindness and low vision were assumed over the period from 2000 to 2020.

    “Constant age-and race/ethnicity-specific prevalences were assumed over this period for both blindness and low vision.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Few national estimates exist for the prevalence of impaired best-corrected visual acuity.

    “Few national estimates exist for the prevalence of impaired best-corrected visual acuity, as was used in the current study, presumably because of the difficulty and expense involved.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The very old (aged 80 years and older) represent the fastest-growing segment of the US population.

    “It is this group, the very old, who represent the fastest-growing segment of the US population.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The estimates from the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project (almost 60% of visual impairment due to uncorrected refractive error) may accurately be applied in the United States.

    “If such estimates may accurately be applied in the United States, the true number of visually impaired Americans might be as high as 8 million.”
4 of 4

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Age-related macular degeneration is the leading cause of blindness in elderly populations of European descent.

    “Age-related macular degeneration is the leading cause of blindness in elderly populations of European descent.”

    From Age-related macular degeneration (2008) · cites this paper as [1]

  • Age-related macular degeneration is the most common cause of visual impairment in individuals over the age of 55 years in developed countries.

    “Age-related macular degeneration is the most common cause of visual impairment in individuals over the age of 55 years in developed countries.1”

    From Age-related macular degeneration (2008) · cites this paper as [1]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • The stated "1 in 28" prevalence conflicts with the reported overall prevalence

    Major

    Table 2 reports visual impairment in 2.76% of Americans aged 40 years and older. That is approximately 1 in 36, not 1 in 28.

    Reported 28 · recomputed 36.231884

  • Figure 2 excludes the blindness threshold used elsewhere

    Minor

    Figure 2 defines blindness as visual acuity strictly worse than 6/60, whereas the paper's US definition includes acuity of exactly 6/60. Thus the figure caption describes a different threshold for its cause-specific results.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. West SK, Munoz B, Rubin GS, et al. Function and visual impairment in a population- based study of older adults. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:72-82.
  2. Hyman L, Wu SY, Connell AM, et al. Prevalence and causes of visual impairment in the Barbados Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:1751-1756.
  3. Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema: Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study report number 1. Arch Ophthalmol. 1985;103:1796-1806.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
The Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group*
Corresponding author
The Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group*
Venue
Archives of Ophthalmology
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2004-04-01
Volume
122
Issue
4
Pages
477
ISSN
0003-9950 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/archopht.122.4.477
OpenAlex
W1789824814
Semantic Scholar
e63937184c8bc856924c06a7c584c8c48c573fc8
Cited by
2,616
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 63 · 2025: 61 · 2024: 79 · 2023: 88 · 2022: 88 · 2021: 126 · 2020: 120 · 2019: 112 · 2018: 141 · 2017: 139 · 2016: 151 · 2015: 160 · 2014: 172 · 2013: 179 · 2012: 151
FWCI
64.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • Erasmus Medisch Centrum
  • National Eye Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Glaucoma and retinal disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
Keywords
blindness, low vision, visual impairment, prevalence, age-related macular degeneration, cataract, glaucoma, racial and ethnic disparities, population aging, population projections, adults
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Australia, Black or African American, Blindness, Cataract, Europe, Female, Glaucoma, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Macular Degeneration, Male, Middle Aged, United States, Visual Acuity, Vision, Low, Causality, Prevalence, Age Distribution, Persons with Visual Disabilities, White People

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review