The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prevalence of Visual Impairment in the United States
Abstract
CONTEXT: The prevalence of visual impairment in the US public has not been surveyed nationally in several decades. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the number of US individuals aged 12 years or older who have impaired distance vision due to uncorrected refractive error. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), using a multistage probability sampling design, included a vision evaluation in a mobile examination center. Visual acuity data were obtained from 13,265 of 14,203 participants (93.4%) who visited the mobile examination center in 1999-2002. Visual impairment was defined as presenting distance visual acuity of 20/50 or worse in the better-seeing eye. Visual impairment due to uncorrected refractive error was defined as (presenting) visual impairment that improved, aided by automated refraction results, to 20/40 or better in the better-seeing eye. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Presenting distance visual acuity (measured with usual corrective lenses, if any) and distance visual acuity after automated refraction. RESULTS: Overall, 1190 study participants had visual impairment (weighted prevalence, 6.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.0%-6.8%), and of these, 83.3% could achieve good visual acuity with correction (95% CI, 80.9%-85.8%). Extrapolating these findings to the general US population, approximately 14 million individuals aged 12 years or older have visual impairment (defined as distance visual acuity of 20/50 or worse), and of these, more than 11 million individuals could have their vision improved to 20/40 or better with refractive correction. CONCLUSIONS: Visual impairment due to uncorrected refractive error is a common condition in the United States. Providing appropriate refractive correction to those individuals whose vision can be improved is an important public health endeavor with implications for safety and quality of life.
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
Cited by
Basch, C. E. (2011) · Journal of School Health · doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00632.x · Cited by 521
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
Vision and the Achievement Gap Among Urban Minority Youth
Basch, C. E. (2011) · Journal of School Health · doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00633.x · Cited by 95
Effects of light scatter and blur on low-contrast vision and disk halo size
Puell, M. C., & Palomo‐Álvarez, C. (2017) · Optometry and Vision Science · doi:10.1097/opx.0000000000001061 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Vitale, S., Cotch, M. F., & Sperduto, R. D.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2006-05-10
- Volume
- 295
- Issue
- 18
- Pages
- 2158
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2037019306
- Cited by
- 376
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.84
- 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: Prevalence of Visual Impairment in the United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.295.18.2158
- The paper
- Vitale, S., Cotch, M. F., & Sperduto, R. D. (2006). Prevalence of Visual Impairment in the United States. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.18.2158
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.