Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Disparities

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Sample weights were used to ensure result generalizability. Results The NHANES comprised 2975 respondents aged 60 years and older who completed the DSST measuring cognitive performance. In the NHANES, distance VI (β = -5.1; 95% CI, -8.6 to -1.6; odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-6.7) and subjective VI (β = -5.3; 95% CI, -8.0 to -2.6; OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.6-4.8) were both associated with lower DSST scores and higher odds of DSST impairment after full adjustment with covariates. Near VI was associated with lower DSST scores but not higher odds of DSST impairment. The NHATS data corroborated these results, with all vision variables associated with higher odds of dementia after full adjustment (distance VI: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.6-2.2; near VI: OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 2.2-3.1; either distance or near VI: OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.8-2.4). Conclusions and relevance In a nationally representative sample of older US adults, vision dysfunction at distance and based on self-reports was associated with poor cognitive function.

Key findings

Why it matters

In a nationally representative sample of older US adults, distance vision problems and self-reported vision problems were associated with poorer cognitive function and higher odds of dementia. This cross-sectional study shows an association only and cannot prove that vision loss causes dementia or that treating vision would prevent it.

Study details

How this study scored 60/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 1 of 4; Study design 4 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 6 of 7; Citations per year 4 of 5; Impact for its field and year 4 of 6; Cited by studies here 2 of 6; Still being cited 3 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record 3 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 60 of 100.60 of 100 points earned40 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (JAMA ophthalmology)
Journal's citation record 1 / 4 JAMA Ophthalmology: journal h-index 143 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 4 / 12 A snapshot of people at one point in time
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2017 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 1,527 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 6 / 7 Cited 311 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 4 / 5 28.3 citations a year over 11 year(s) since 2017
Impact for its field and year 4 / 6 Cited 14.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 2 / 6 Cited by 6 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 118 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Suzann Pershing: h-index 33 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 3 / 3 Stanford University: institution h-index 2,684 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 28817745)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 60 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Chen, S. P., Bhattacharya, J., & Pershing, S. (2017). Association of Vision Loss With Cognition in Older Adults. JAMA ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.2838

Vancouver

Chen SP, Bhattacharya J, Pershing S. Association of Vision Loss With Cognition in Older Adults. JAMA ophthalmology. 2017. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.2838. PMID: 28817745.

BibTeX

@article{chen2017-28817745,
  author  = {Chen, S. P. and Bhattacharya, J. and Pershing, S.},
  title   = {{Association of Vision Loss With Cognition in Older Adults}},
  journal = {JAMA ophthalmology},
  year    = {2017},
  doi     = {10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.2838},
  pmid    = {28817745},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.2838}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

6 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Disparities

Similar studies

More on Disparities

See all studies in Disparities →