The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Economic Burden of Major Adult Visual Disorders in the United States
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the societal economic burden and the governmental budgetary impact of the following visual disorders among US adults aged 40 years and older: visual impairment, blindness, refractive error, age-related macular degeneration, cataracts, diabetic retinopathy, and primary open-angle glaucoma. DESIGN: We estimated 3 components of economic burden: direct medical costs, other direct costs, and productivity losses. We used private insurance and Medicare claims data to estimate direct medical costs; epidemiologic evidence from multiple published sources to estimate other direct costs, such as nursing home costs; and data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation to estimate productivity losses. We used budgetary documents and our direct medical and other direct cost estimates to approximate the governmental budgetary impact. RESULTS: We estimated that the annual total financial burden of major adult visual disorders is $35.4 billion ($16.2 billion in direct medical costs, $11.1 billion in other direct costs, and $8 billion in productivity losses) and that the annual governmental budgetary impact is $13.7 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Major visual disorders among Americans older than 40 years result in substantial economic costs for the US economy. Well-designed public health programs may have the ability to reduce this burden in the future.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes
Drummond, M. E., Sculpher, M. J., Torrance, G. W., O’Brien, B. J., & Stoddart, G. L. (2005) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198529446.001.0001 · Cited by 13,648
Causes and Prevalence of Visual Impairment Among Adults in the UnitedStates
(2004) · Archives of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1001/archopht.122.4.477 · Cited by 2,616
Longitudinal rates of annual eye examinations of persons with diabetes and chronic eye diseases
Lee, P. P., Feldman, Z. W., Ostermann, J., Brown, D. S., & Sloan, F. A. (2003) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(03)00817-0 · Cited by 184
Cited by
Ting, D. S. W., Cheung, G. C. M., & Wong, T. Y. (2016) · Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology · doi:10.1111/ceo.12696 · Cited by 1,066
The worldwide epidemic of diabetic retinopathy
Congdon, N., Zheng, Y., & He, M. (2012) · Indian Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.4103/0301-4738.100542 · Cited by 632
Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Preferred Practice Pattern®
Gedde, S. J., Vinod, K., Wright, M. M., Muir, K. W., Lind, J. T., Chen, P. P., Li, T., & Mansberger, S. L. (2021) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.10.022 · Cited by 474
Varma, R., Vajaranant, T. S., Burkemper, B., Wu, S., Torres, M., Hsu, C., Choudhury, F., & McKean-Cowdin, R. (2016) · JAMA Ophthalmology · doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.1284 · Cited by 445
Estimating the Economic Burden of Racial Health Inequalities in the United States
LaVeist, T. A., Gaskin, D., & Richard, P. (2011) · International Journal of Health Services · doi:10.2190/hs.41.2.c · Cited by 378
Metadata
- Authors
- Rein, D. B.
- Venue
- Archives of Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2006-12-01
- Volume
- 124
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1754
- ISSN
- 0003-9950 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2161487737
- Cited by
- 635
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 14.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Economic Burden of Major Adult Visual Disorders in the United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archopht.124.12.1754
- The paper
- Rein, D. B. (2006). The Economic Burden of Major Adult Visual Disorders in the United States. Archives of Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.124.12.1754
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.