The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Vision impairment, eye disease, and injurious motor vehicle crashes in the elderly
Abstract
The objective of this case-control study was to identify visual risk factors for vehicle crashes by elderly drivers which result in injury. The sample consisted of licensed current drivers between 55 and 87 years of age who resided in Jefferson County, Alabama. Subjects were identified through Alabama Department of Public Safety (ADPS) files. Two groups of cases were identified. One group (N = 78) was defined as those drivers who had incurred at least one vehicle crash between 1985 and 1990 resulting in an injury to anyone in the involved vehicles according to the accident report. The other case group (N = 101) consisted of drivers involved in non-injurious crashes during the same time period. Controls (N = 115), also selected from ADPS files, were older drivers not involved in crashes during the same five-year period. Subjects underwent a battery of visual processing tests and a comprehensive eye examination. The main results were that restricted useful field of view and glaucoma were the only significant independent predictors of injurious crash involvement. Odds ratios (ORs) for reductions in the useful field of view of 23-40%, 41-60% and greater than 60% were 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-11.8), 13.6 (95% CI, 5.8-39.7), and 17.2 (95% CI, 5.3-55.6), respectively, compared to reductions of less than 23% (p for trend < 0.001). The OR for glaucoma was 3.6 (95% CI, 1.0-12.6). Useful field of view impairment was the only variable independently associated with non-injurious crash involvement. This study implies that impaired visual processing and glaucoma may play a role in the etiology of older driver crashes which result in injury.
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
Seven chronic conditions: their impact on US adults' activity levels and use of medical services
Verbrugge, L. M., & Patrick, D. L. (1995) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.85.2.173 · Cited by 356
Cited by
Effects of Cognitive Training Interventions With Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Ball, K., Berch, D. B., Helmers, K. F., Jobe, J. B., Leveck, M. D., Marsiske, M., Morris, J. N., Rebok, G. W., Smith, D. M., Tennstedt, S. L., et al. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.18.2271 · Cited by 2,049
Self-citationCognitive, sensory and physical factors enabling driving safety in older adults
Anstey, K. J., Wood, J., Lord, S., & Walker, J. G. (2005) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2004.07.008 · Cited by 983
Owsley, C., & McGwin, G. (2010) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/j.visres.2010.05.021 · Cited by 451
Self-citationBall, K. K., Roenker, D. L., Wadley, V. G., Edwards, J. D., Roth, D. L., McGwin, G., Raleigh, R., Joyce, J. J., Cissell, G. M., & Dube, T. (2006) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.00568.x · Cited by 437
Self-citationJobe (2001) · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(01)00139-8 · Cited by 376
Metadata
- Authors
- Owsley, C., McGwin Jr, G., & Ball, K.
- Venue
- Ophthalmic Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers
- Published
- 1998-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 101-113
- ISSN
- 0928-6586 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-5086
- OpenAlex
- W2096440712
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.19
- 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: Vision impairment, eye disease, and injurious motor vehicle crashes in the elderly. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1076/opep.5.2.101.1574
- The paper
- Owsley, C., McGwin Jr, G., & Ball, K. (1998). Vision impairment, eye disease, and injurious motor vehicle crashes in the elderly. Ophthalmic Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1076/opep.5.2.101.1574
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.