Cited by 163Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies

Cognitive Impairment in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study: AREDS Report No. 16

Open access
Traci E. Clemons, Molly W. Rankin, Wendy L. McBee·2006·Archives of Ophthalmology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate potential associations between cognitive function and/or impairment and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and visual impairment in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS). METHODS: The AREDS is an 11-center natural history study of AMD and age-related cataract. The AREDS Cognitive Function Battery was administered to 2946 participants. The battery consists of 6 neuropsychological tests measuring performance in several cognitive domains. The Dunnett multiple comparison test was used to identify differences by AMD and visual acuity severity. The relationship with cognitive impairment was also assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Mean scores of instruments in the AREDS Cognitive Function Battery declined with increased macular abnormalities and reduced visual acuity. After adjustment for age, sex, race, education, smoking status, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and depression, increased macular abnormalities (trend P value <.05) reduced mean cognitive function scores as measured by the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination and the Wechsler Logical Memory Scale. Reduced vision was found to be associated with reduced mean cognitive function scores as measured by the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination and letter and verbal fluency tasks. Persons with vision worse than 20/40 OU were more likely to be cognitively impaired (Modified Mini-Mental State Examination score <80) (odds ratio, 2.88 [95% confidence interval, 1.75-4.76]) compared with persons with visual acuity of 20/40 or better OU. CONCLUSION: These data suggest a possible association of advanced AMD and visual acuity with cognitive impairment in older persons.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archopht.124.4.537

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clemons, T. E., Rankin, M. W., & McBee, W. L.
Venue
Archives of Ophthalmology
Published
2006-04-01
Volume
124
Issue
4
Pages
537
ISSN
0003-9950 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2191923109
Cited by
163
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 9
FWCI
3.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • National Institutes of Health (1z01ey000394-01)
  • National Eye Institute (Z01 EY000394-03)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Keywords
age-related macular degeneration, cognitive impairment, visual impairment, visual acuity, cognitive function, older adults, neuropsychological assessment, senile cataract
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Intelligence Tests, Macular Degeneration, Male, Middle Aged, Vision Disorders, Visual Acuity, Persons with Visual Disabilities

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