Skip to main content
BMJ Open logoLink to BMJ Open
. 2022 Jan 6;12(1):e047929. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047929

Vision impairment and cognitive decline among older adults: a systematic review

Niranjani Nagarajan 1, Lama Assi 1, V Varadaraj 1, Mina Motaghi 2, Yi Sun 2, Elizabeth Couser 3, Joshua R Ehrlich 4,5, Heather Whitson 6, Bonnielin K Swenor 1,7,
PMCID: PMC8739068  PMID: 34992100

Abstract

Objectives

There has been increasing epidemiological research examining the association between vision impairment (VI) and cognitive impairment and how poor vision may be a modifiable risk factor for cognitive decline. The objective of this systematic review is to synthesise the published literature on the association of VI with cognitive decline, cognitive impairment or dementia, to aid the development of interventions and guide public policies pertaining to the relationship between vision and cognition.

Methods

A literature search was performed with Embase, Medline and Cochrane library databases from inception to March 2020, and included abstracts and articles published in peer-reviewed journals in English. Our inclusion criteria included publications that contained subjective/objective measures of vision and cognition, or a diagnosis of VI, cognitive impairment or dementia. Longitudinal or cross-sectional studies with ≥100 participants aged >50 years were included. The search identified 11 805 articles whose abstracts underwent screening by three teams of study authors. Data abstraction and quality assessment using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool were performed by one author (NN). 10% of the articles underwent abstraction and appraisal by a second author (LA/VV), results were compared between both and were in agreement.

Results

110 full-text articles were selected for data extraction, of which 53 were cross-sectional, 43 longitudinal and 14 were case–control studies. The mean age of participants was 73.0 years (range 50–93.1). Ninety-one (83%) of these studies reported that VI was associated with cognitive impairment.

Conclusion

Our systematic review indicates that a majority of studies examining the vision–cognition relationship report that VI is associated with more cognitive decline, cognitive impairment or dementia among older adults. This synthesis supports the need for additional research to understand the mechanisms underlying the association between VI and cognitive impairment and to test interventions that mitigate the cognitive consequences of VI.

Keywords: epidemiology, delirium & cognitive disorders, ophthalmology, geriatric medicine


Strengths and limitations of this study.

  • There was heterogeneity in the measurement of cognitive and visual function among all included studies.

  • The quality assessment tool used for assessing quality of included studies penalised longitudinal studies that lost over 40% of participants due to drop-outs/withdrawals, which is common in studies that span over many years.

  • Majority of the included studies were cross-sectional, and these are prone to selection bias.

Introduction

Dementia is among the most pressing public health challenges of the 21st century.1 In 2015, 46.8 million people were living with dementia, and the number is expected to double every 20 years.2 Vision impairment (VI), another major global health problem, affects at least 2.2 billion people worldwide,3 most of whom are aged 50 years and older.4 Both cognitive and VI are projected to affect an increasing number of people over time, primarily due to population ageing.4 5

Prior work has suggested that cognition and vision are associated,6 7 and while there are shared risk factors (neuropathological/vascular),8 there is also longitudinal evidence that VI is associated with cognitive changes.9 The mechanisms underlying the vision-cognition relationship have not yet been fully characterised, but it is hypothesised that sensory loss, such as hearing impairment and VI, may lead to increased cognitive load, structural and functional changes in the brain, and decreased emotional and social well-being, all of which could potentially increase the risk of cognitive impairment.9 10 While the role of treating hearing loss in preventing cognitive impairment has been acknowledged, VI has not yet been recognised as a potentially modifiable risk factor for cognitive impairment.1 11

Since the majority of VI is due to correctable conditions, namely refractive error and cataract,12 establishing the existence of an association between vision and cognitive impairment could present an additional opportunity to prevent cognitive impairment and dementia through interventions that optimise vision. In this systematic review of the literature, we examined the association between cognitive and vision impairment among older adults in existing observational studies. This qualitative review summarises the existing research examining the vision–cognition relationship, providing insight on data gaps and areas for continued investigation, as well as highlighting differences in methodological approaches that may impact the interpretation of results across studies.

Methods/literature search

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (online esupplemental file 1).

Supplementary data

bmjopen-2020-047929supp001.pdf (66.7KB, pdf)

Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies reporting a measure of association between visual function and cognitive impairment were included if they had ≥100 participants aged of ≥50 years (mean) at baseline. Reasons for exclusion of studies were: (1) Outcome measure was not vision or cognition, (2) Association between vision and cognition was not explored, (3) Sample size <100, (4) Publication not in English, (5) Mean age <50 years, (6) No cognitive measure, (7) No vision measure and (8) Outcome was not part of inclusion criteria.

An academic librarian searched: Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane and PubMed from their inception to March 2020, and developed a search strategy that combined controlled vocabulary and keywords related to geriatrics, cognition and vision (online esupplemental file 2-complete Ovid Medline search strategy). Searches were limited to human studies published in English. Conference and poster abstracts, and short oral presentations were also included.

Supplementary data

bmjopen-2020-047929supp002.pdf (50.4KB, pdf)

Search results were exported to Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia). Three teams of two reviewers each worked independently and in duplicate to screen titles, abstracts and full-text articles to determine inclusion (NN and MM; EC and YS; VV and LA). Disagreements were adjudicated by a member of the other study team.

Data were extracted from the included publications by one author (NN), and another (LA) extracted data from a random sample of 10% to compare results. Any discrepancies were adjudicated by a third author (VV). Data collected for each publication included: study design, participant characteristics, vision and cognition assessment methods and the summary measure that described the vision–cognition association.

The methodological quality of included studies was assessed by one author (NN) using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP)13 and the global quality ratings and findings were summarised qualitatively. A random 10% sample was reviewed by another author (VV) to ascertain consistency in quality assessment (QA).

Results

Study Selection

Online esupplemental file 3 is a PRISMA flow chart that describes the results of the search strategy of articles that examined the association between VI and cognitive impairment or decline. Of the 11 805 studies that were imported for screening, 110 articles were included in our final systematic review.7 14–122

Supplementary data

bmjopen-2020-047929supp003.pdf (30.8KB, pdf)

Description of included studies

Table 1 describes the characteristics of the studies included. The total number of participants in this review was 9 799 329 (range: 112–7 210 535 per study), with a mean age of 73.0 years, (range: 50.0–93.1). Of the total 110 studies included, 53 were cross-sectional, 43 were longitudinal and 14 had a case–control study design. The range of follow-up time for the longitudinal studies was 2 months to 10 years.

Table 1.

Patient demographics and study characteristics

Demographics and study characteristics No
 Total no of studies 110
 Total no of participants 9 799 329
 Mean age, year, IQR 73.0 (50–93.06)
Study design
 Cross-sectional 53 (48%)
 Longitudinal 43 (39%)
 Case-control 14 (13%)
Country
 USA 30 (27%)
 Japan 6 (5%)
 UK 6 (5%)
 China 6 (5%)
 Australia 5 (4.5%)
 France 5 (4.5%)
 Germany 5 (4.5%)
 Singapore 5 (4.5%)
 Ireland 3 (3%)
 Canada 3 (3%)
 Spain 2 (2%)
 Taiwan 2 (2%)
 Sweden 1 (<1%)
 Nordic Countries 1 (<1%)
 New Zealand 1 (<1%)
 Switzerland 1 (<1%)
 Netherland 1 (<1%)
 Others 27 (25%)

Of the 110 studies included, 51 reported findings from participants enrolled in population-based studies. There were five studies each from the following large population based longitudinal studies: English Longitudinal Study of Aging (ELSA) and The Three-City Study. Three studies each from Fujiwara-Kyo Study, Salisbury Eye Evaluation Study, Irish Longitudinal Study on Aging and Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Diseases. Two studies each came from The Newcastle 85+ study, Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, Blue Mountain Eye Study, Australian Longitudinal Study on Aging, Health and Retirement Study, National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), Leiden 85+ study, Health ABC study and the Singapore Malay Eye Study. Additionally, 10 studies used insurance claims data from different countries.

The studies in this review included participants from over 17 different countries (table 1), 30 studies (27%) from the USA, followed by 25 studies from Europe (23%) including the UK, Germany, Ireland, Finland, Switzerland, France and Netherlands. Ninety of the studies were published between 2009 and 2020. All papers provided a description of sampling methods. 16 studies were included which were either conference abstracts or short oral presentations.24 32 45 49–51 53 56 92 93 96 112–116

Assessment of cognitive function

To assess cognitive function, 89 studies used objective assessments, 13 used other assessment methods such as self-report and diagnosis codes, and 7 studies used a combination of both (table 2); one study did not provide information about cognitive function assessment.92 Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) was the most commonly used objective method to assess cognitive function (42 studies). Other methods used to objectively measure cognition included: Montreal-Cognitive Assessment test,28 32 34 53 93 Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised,45 61 79 Cognitive Performance Scale,42 49 65 Blessed-Orientation-Memory-Concentration test,25 62 Abbreviated Mental Test,72 74 89 100 110 119 Blessed Dementia Scale,86 Digit Symbol Substitution Test 22 122 and Cambridge Cognitive Examination test.88 For the studies that used other assessment methods, four used self-reported cognitive measures,18 22 39 105 and nine used diagnostic codes to define cognitive decline and/or dementia.19–21 51 69 99 103 115 117 Among the studies that used a combination of objective and subjective methods, four used self-reported cognitive function along with an objective measure.22 30 48 55

Table 2.

Measures of vision and cognition assessed in studies

Outcome measures No of studies
Cognition (n, %)
Objective assessment n=89 (81%)
MMSE 42 (47%)
MoCA 5 (6%)
Global cognition scale 6 (7%)
Others 36 (40%)
Other assessment methods n=13 (12%)
Self-report 4 (31%)
ICD diagnosis/from records 9 (69%)
Combination of Objective+Subjective (5%) 7
No info (<1%) 1
Vision (n, %)
Objective n=66 (70%)
Acuity 42 (65%)
Acuity+others 16 (23%)
Others 8 (12%)
Other assessment methods n=34 (22%)
Self-report 24 (71%)
ICD diagnosis/from records 10 (29%)
Combination of Objective+Subjective (7.5%) 8
No info (<1%) 2

MMSE, Mini-Mental State Examination; MoCA, Montreal-Cognitive Assessment.

Assessment of visual function

In order to assess visual function, 66 studies used objective assessments, 34 used other assessment methods such as self-report and diagnosis codes, and 8 studies used a combination of both (table 2); no information was available from two studies.24 116 Visual acuity (VA) was the most commonly measured visual function (42 studies), of which the Snellen acuity chart was the most commonly used method (18 studies). VA was also measured in combination with other visual functions, including: visual fields (VF) (six studies),20 51 70 90 102 118 contrast sensitivity (CS) (eight studies),29 52 86 93 94 102 118 122 macular pigment optical density (two studies)14 34 and fundus photography (two studies).63 118 Other methods used to objectively measure visual functions included: colour vision,17 VF only,28 CS only,35 76 fundus photo with grading38 100 and autorefraction.74 Other assessment methods included: self-reported vision (24 studies) and diagnostic codes or patient records to define VI (10 studies).19 21 46 69 83 99 104 115 117 121 The studies that used a combination of methods, eight studies used self-report along with an objective measure of visual function.22 40 53 59 68 71 107 113

Quality of studies

The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the EPHPP.13 The tool assessed each study on five domains: (1) Selection bias, (2) Study design, (3) Confounders, (4) Data collection methods and (5) Analysis. For each included study the five relevant domains were ranked on a three-point Likert scale with three representing a low risk of bias (‘strong’), two a possible risk of bias (‘moderate’) and one a high risk of bias (‘weak’). An overall rating was derived following the EPHPP methodology. A study consisting of at least one ‘weak’ rating in a domain received an overall rating of ‘moderate,’ while those with two or more domains with ‘weak’ ratings were automatically classified as ‘weak’ overall. We present our studies in three different tables which is categorised based on the overall ratings, with ‘strong’, ‘moderate’ and ‘weak’ studies in tables 3–5, respectively. In our sample, 17 studies received a rating of strong, 70 moderate and 23 weak.

Table 3.

Studies with a ‘strong’ rating

Author, title and year Country (Study name if applicable) Study design No of participants Mean age (M/F) Gender (M/F) Outcome variable CI: type of measurement/evaluation VI: Type of measurement/
evaluation
Point estimates and analysis performed Summary of association Quality of study
Dearborn et al27 US (Maine-Syracuse Longitudinal Study (MSLS) Longitudinal cohort, wave 6&7 655 Normal VA 60.34 40%/60% Cognition Visual-Spatial Organisation and Memory, Scanning and Tracking, Verbal Episodic and Working memory Acuity: Snellen eye test (log transformed) Cross-sectional (CSA) and prospective analysis (PA) using multiple linear and multiple logistic regression Poorer VA associated with lower cognitive function and 5 year decline Strong
2018 compared sixth (2001–2006) wave and VI 70.6 40%/60% Global composite score-loaded equally across domains, z-transformed Global OR: CSA 1.512 (0.71 to 3.23), PA 1.539 (0.74 to 3.21), VSMO OR: CSA 1.28 (0.63 to 2.59), PA 2.26 (1.16 to 4.4) in cognitive function over a range of domains incl the global measurements
seventh (2006–2010) wave)

Working OR: CSA 1.73 (0.85 to 3.51), PA 1.55 (0.78 to 3.08), VEM OR: CSA 0.55 (0.25 to 1.24), PA 1.43 (0.73 to 2.81) Visual-spatial organisation, verbal episodic memory

Diniz-Filho et al28 USA Longitudinal cohort 115 67.4 Cognitive Decline Montreal-Cognitive Assessment test (MoCA); assesses atten and concentration, executive functions Standard Automated Perimetry (SAP) using 24–2 SITA Univariate: 5-point decline in MoCA=0.18 dB increase of residuals of SAP MD, R2=4.3% (0.06 to 0.30) p0.003 Statistically significant association between change in Strong
2017 memory, language, visuoconstructional skills, conceptual thinking, calculations and orientation <33% fixation loss and<15% FP only included Multivariate: 5-point decline in MoCA=0.23 dB inc of residuals of SAP MD, (0.11 to 0.35) p<0.001 MoCA scores and VF variability over time
Fischer et al35 USA (The Epidemiology of Hearing Loss Study) Longitudinal cohort. Baseline info was from EHLS-2 (1998–2000), CI data from EHLS-3 (2003–05)and EHLS-4 (2009–10) 1884 66.7 40.9/49.1 Cognition MMSE Contrast sensitivity using Pelli-Robson letter charts. VI was defined as Cox discrete time proportional hazard analyses performed to model relationship btwn CI and Sensory Imp. Hearing, Visual and Olfactory impairment were independently Strong
2016 score<1.55 log units in the better eye Vision: HR=2.05 (1.24, 3.38); Olfaction: HR=3.92 (2.45, 6.26), Hearing: HR=1.90 (1.11, 3.26) associated with cognitive impairment risk
Hall43 USA (Impact of Cataract on Mobility (ICOM) study) Longitudinal cohort study. 3 groups identified: No cataract, with cataract and undergoing surgery, with cataract and declined surgery No Cat: 92 66.8 48.9/51.1 Cognition Mattis Organic Mental Syndrome Screening Examination (MOMSSE)- evaluates 14 domains (abstraction, Acuity: Dist VA ETDRS chart, Log Contrast senstivity: Pelli-Robson chart Cat+no Sx & cat+surgery grps signifcantly less CI (p<0.001 and p=0.009, respectively) than at baseline. Cataract surgery does not affect cognitive function Strong
2005 W Cat+Sx: 122 70.9 41.8/58.2 orientation, memory, speech, comprehension). Scored 0 to 28 (lower score higher functioning) Ophthalmologist/optometrist graded cataract at clinic visit No cataract group=no change in Cog status, association between change in VA in the better and worse eye and
W cat+no SX: 87 71.1 59.8/40.2 change in MOMSSE observed (p=0.003 &p=0.03, respectively)
Lin et al47 USA (Study of Osteoporotic Fractures) Longitudinal cohort Vision testing sample:1668 75.9 0/100 Cognition 3MS-Modified version of MMSE Acuity: Bailey Lovie Target VI (worse than 20/40): Cog decline - 1.78 (1.21 to 2.61), Functional decline- 1.79 (1.15 to 2.79) Vision impairment is associated with greater odds of cognitive and Strong
2004 Overall 6112 76.1 DSI: Cog decline - 2.19 (1.26 to 3.81), Functional decline- 1.87 (1.01 to 3.47) functional decline over time in older women
Jefferis et al46 UK Longitudinal cohort. 112 Normal cog: 80 (3.8) 20/80 Vision Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (which includes the MMSE) Acuity: LogMAR, Other: VFQ-25 Normal cog group: Mean at baseline 0.13 (0.09), 1 year FU 0 (0.09), 95% CI for difference: 0.09 to 0.16<0.001 Patients with impaired cognition benefit from cataract surgery, but not to the same extent as patients with normal cognition. Cognitive impairment may, however, limit visual improvements Strong
2015 Impaired cog: 81.2 (3.9) 30/70 Impaired cog group: Mean at baseline 0.18 (0.14), 1 year FU 0.06 (0.11), 95% CI for difference: 0.08 to 0.16 following cataract surgery
Reyes-Ortiz et al7 USA (Hispanic Established Populations for Epidemiologic Studies of the Elderly) Longitudinal cohort. 2140 Near VI: 73.5 39.3/60.7 Cognition MMSE-blind Acuity: subjects hold cards at least seven inches from their eyes and asking them to read the numbers Near vision impairment, −0.62±0.29,.03, Interaction btwn near VI & time=−0.13 +/- 0.07,.045 Results showed that near vision impairment was predictive of Strong
2005 Distance VI: 75.3 35/65 Each card had 7-digit ''telephone numbers'' of three different type sizes: 7, 10, and 23 points Distance vision impairment=−0.06 +/- 0.36,.87, Interaction btwn distance VI & time, −0.12±0.08,.14 cog decline in older Mexican Americans independent of other health factors
Haan et al67 USA (Women’s Health Initiative MS-MRI) Longitudinal cohort 511 69 0/100 Cognition Modified Mini Mental State (3 MS) Acuity: Snellen with pinhole Acuity slope in model of 3MSE score (β slope ⫽ 0.33, p=0.06). Covariate-adjusted mean 3MSE scores for women Retinopathy as a marker of small vessel disease is a risk factor for cerebrovascular disease that may influence cognitive performance and related brain changes Strong
2012 with retinopathy compared with others throughout follow-up: mean (SE) difference 1.01 (0.43), p=0.019 Very mild association between acuity and 3MSE scores
Trick et al70 USA Case-control. Visually and cognitively normal controls (n=61), and senile dementia of Alzheimer’s type (SDAT) n=61 122 SDAT: 73.4 NA Cognition each patient was assigned a clinical dementia rating (CDR) based on a scale developed and tested at Washington Uni Acuity: ETDRS. VF analysis using 30–2 HFA Patient groups, Foveal threshold, Mean deviation, Pattern SD, Corrected pattern SD. We found that the frequency of potentially unreliable VF was significantly higher (chisquare, Strong
1995 Control: 72.8 i.e CDR scale ranges from 0.0 (individual without dementia) to 3.0 (severely demented). Control (n=44): 33.2±3.05,–2.81+/−3.45, 3.48±2.05, 2.58±2.30 p=0.0232) in SDAT patients (44.3%) than in controls (27.9%)
SDAT (n=34): 30.79+4.00 (p=0.0027), −5.11+/−3.17(p=0.0057), 4.461+/−2.49(NS), 3.91+/−2.73(p=0.0408)
CDR=0.5(n=25): 31.12+/−3.54, −4.25+/−2.23, 4.47+/−2.60, 3.83+/−2.89
Helmer et al80 France (The Three-City-Alienor Cohort) Longitudinal, cohort 812 79.7 35/65 Cognition MMSE; Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test
Isaacs Set Test the Trail Making Test parts A and B
Then suspected cases were assessed by a neurologist
Acuity: No chart name provided, IOP: pneumotonometer Association of OAG and incident dementia: Model 1: OR 4.3 95% CI 1.7 to 10.8 p 0.0020, Model 2: OR 4.2 95% CI 1.6 to 10.9 p 0.0030 Yes. Results show that OAG participants were at an increased risk for developing dementia during the 3 year follow-up time period. Strong
2013 Model 3: OR 3.9 95% CI 1.5 to 10.4 p 0.0054, Association of Vertical cup:disk ratio and incident dementia:
≥0.65: OR 3.7 95% CI 1.4 to 9.7 p 0.0083
≥0.70: OR4.4 95% CI 1.5 to 12.5 p 0.0055
Association of Minimal rim:disk ratio =< 0.1 and incident dementia: OR 2.7 95%CI 1.005−7.1 p 0.0489
de la Fuente et al97 UK (English Longitudinal Study of Ageing) Longitudinal, cohort 3508 69 43.2/56.8 Cognition Four measured tests of verbal fluency, processing speed, Three self-reported items covering eyesight in far, near, and general vision Visual (β=0.140, p<0.001) difficulties predicted cognitive difficulties 8 years later Yes. Visual difficulties were identified as predictors of Strong
2018 and short-term and long-term memory Dichotomized, collapsing “Excellent,” “Very good,” and “Good” as “Absence of difficulties”. The latent increase in cognitive difficulties was steeper in people with visual impairment (d=0.52, p<0.001) subsequent cognitive decline in the old age
Hamalainen et al98 Canada (Canadian Longitudinal Study on Ageing) Cross-sectional cohort 30 029 No info No info Cognition five cognitive tests: Mental Alternation Test, Animal Fluency test, Controlled Oral Word Association Test, Stroop test Vision was measured as the better-seeing eye pinhole-corrected VA (reported in logMAR) VA was a predictor of only executive function (b=−0.785, p<0.001) but not memory Yes, greater executive function scores were associated with better vision Strong
2019 and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test with immediate and 5 min recall
Chuanying Huang UK (English Longitudinal Study of Ageing) Cross-sectional cohort 4197 Optimal:70.21 58.6/41.4 Cognition Memory (immediate and delayed), verbal fluency, and time orientation Self-report: ‘Is your eyesight (using glasses or corrective lens as usual) excellent, very good, good, fair, poor, or registered blind?’ poor vision (= –1.309, p=0.004), and poor dual sensory function (= –2.442, p=0.013) was associated with worse cognition Yes. Strong
2019 Good: 71.84 51.2/48.8 Global cognition was the sum of scores for the three domains, and higher score indicates better cognitive performance Answer of ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’was defined as optimal vision. Answer of ‘fair’ or ‘poor’ was
Poor: 74.75 47.2/52.8 defined as poor vision. Thus vision was classified as optimal, good, and poor vision
Virginie Naël France (The Three-City-Alienor Cohort) Longitudinal, cohort 7736 Incident dem:76.9 34.8/65.2 Cognition 3-step procedure: 1. MMSE, the Isaacs set test and the Benton Visual Retention Test Near VA assessed using the Parinaud scale. Mild near VI was classifed by Parinaud three or 4 (Snellen equivalent 20/30–20/60) Moderate to severe near VI was associated with an increased risk of dementia in the frst 2 years (HR2.0, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.3) Yes. Near VI may represent an indicator of dementia risk at Strong
2019 No inci dem: 73.6 39.2/60.8 2.senior neurologist to establish a clinical diagnosis, 3.an independent committee of and moderate to severe near VI by Parinaud>4 (Snellen equivalent<20/60) and from 2 to 4 years (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.1). distance VF loss was associated with an increased risk beyond 4 years (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.0) short and middle-term, mostly in depressedelderly people
neurologists and geriatricians reviewed all potential cases of dementia obtain
a consensus on the diagnosis and aetiology, according to the
DSM-IV and the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria
Dist VA was selfreported, defned as an inability or diffculty in recognising a familiar face at 4 m but the association was no longer signifcant after taking into account baseline cognitive performances
Zhi Wei Lim Singapore (Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Diseases) Longitudinal cohort 2478 67.6 50.7/49.3 Cognition A locally validated Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT) VA was measured at 4 m using the logMAR number chart Baseline VI was associated with a decrease in AMT score over 6 years (β = −0.27; 95% CI, −0.37 to −0.17; p<0.001) Yes, poor vision was independently associated with a decline in cognitive function Strong
2020 (Lighthouse International).VI was defined as presenting VA worse than 20/40. When change in vision over 6 years was evaluated, unchanged or deteriorated VI was associated
with a decrease in AMT score over 6 years (β = −0.29; 95% CI, −0.40 to −0.18; P <.001)
Bernard Michalowsky Germany (NA) Case-control study 122 708 81 39/61 Cognition ICD-10 diagnosis code for dementia ICD-10 codes for visual impairment Visual impairment was not significantly associated with dementia (OR=0.97, CI=95% 0.97 to 1.02, p=0.219) No, but DSI was significantly associated with risk of dementia Strong
2019 Combination of both visual and hearing impairments and the risk of dementia (OR=1.14, CI=95% 1.04 to 1.24, p=0.005)
Jung-Yu Liao121 Taiwan (National Health Insurance Research database) Case-control study 9200 NA LOAD 36.7/63.3 Cognition LOAD cases diagnosed as dementia and prescribed any acetylcholinesterase inhibtiors (AChEIs) ICD-9 codes Disorders of refraction and accomodation with LOAD OR for Year 1,2,3,4: 1.2, Year 6:1.3 Yes, in the path analysis model, disorders of ref and acc Strong
2020 1997–2013 Without LOAD 36.7/63.3 Total effect reflects an association between prior diseases and LOAD incidence via all paths in the model: 0.042 had a significant positive effect on LOAD incidence

DSI, dual sensory impairment; MMSE, Mini-Mental State Examination; VA, visual acuity; VF, visual field.

Table 4.

Studies with a ‘moderate’ rating

Author and title Country (Study name if applicable) Study design No of participants Mean age (M/F) Gender (M/F) Outcome variable CI: type of measurement/evaluation VI: Type of measurement/evaluation Point estimates and analysis performed Summary of association Quality of study
Ajana et al14 France (ALIENOR study, 3 City-Bordeaux cohort) France Cross-sectional study 184 82.3 31.5%/68.5% Cognition MMSE, Isaacs Set test (IST15), Benton Visual Retention test, Free and Cues Selective Reminding Test Acuity: Measured but no mention of method MPOD 0.5 degree, Z score (b)=0.12 (0.01, 0.23). MPOD 1 degree, Z score (b)=0.11 (0.01, 0.22) Yes- Between MPOD and Global cognitive z score Moderate
2018 Summarised by a composite global cognitive Z-score MPOD: Measured using confocal scanning laser Ophthalmoscope Regression models
Anstey et al15 Australia (Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing) Longitudinal 1823 77.77 51.2%/49.8% Cognition and vision MMSE, Verbal ability, Processing speed and Memory Acuity: Distance using Snellen chart at 3 m, Near at 20 cm N/A Yes- significant moderate-sized association between rates of Moderate
2003 Analysis of change using growth curves using chart containg short passages in font size 5 to 18. Left and Right eye were tested separately. Score was the smallest font size Latent growth curve analysis change in Memory and Vision
Anstey et al16 Australia (Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing) Longitudinal 3766 76.34 Wave 1: 56%/44% Cognition Verbal ability, Processing speed and Memory Acuity: Distance using Snellen chart at 3 m Sensory status x group interaction for memory comparing participants who declined on Vision vs not declined Yes- Decline in visual performance had a significant Moderate
2001 Wave 3: 33%/67% Wilks A=0.98, F=2.94, p<0.05, n2=0.054 effect on decline in memory performance
Two-factor repeated measures MANCOVA (sensory status*wave)
Arnaoutoglou et al17 Greece Longitudinal, Case-control Total 103 AD group n=32 AD 73.3 38%/62% Vision MMSE, Dementia blood screening, Reisberg AD scale, MRI and NINDS-AIREN to diagnose VaD Colour vision using Ischihara colour deficiency test Difference in ischihara scores between two groups F(1,161)=9.558, p=0.003. AUC 0.819 (0.70, 0.93) Yes- Ischihara a promising test to differentiate AD and Moderate
2017 VaD group n=36 VaD 75.6 Consists of 38 pseudoisochromaric plates ANOVA to estimate any sig variations between three groups within their age, MMSE, Resiberg and VaD
Healthy controls n=35 Controls 74.2 six errors suggests definite colour blindness total Ischihara score
Arrighi et al18 US (National Health interview survey (NHIS)2001–05) Cross-sectional study using nationally available survey data 23 474 With dementia 80.72 With dementia 36%/64% Vision Self reported surveys. Was categorised as With dementia if patient reported :senile” Self reported vision problems Prevalence OR 1.46 vision problems with funtional limitations among americans aged>60 Yes- Higher odds of vision problems being prevalent Moderate
2010 Person with dementia 443 Without dementia 72.3 Without 39%/61% with and without limitations related to dementia among people with funtional limitation
Without dementia 23 031
Bauer et al19 German statutory health insurance fund data (2006) Cross-sectional study using claims data from insurance company 37 753 80.1 28.4%/71.6% Comorbidity complex ICD codes with diagnoses of dementia ICD codes with diagnoses of severe vision reduction OR 0.59 persons with severe vision problems were less likely to have dementia Yes- significantly lesser odds of vison problems among Moderate
2014 Dementia group 9139 81.6 25.4%/74.6% Patient having a diagnosis of vision prob cases with dementia
Without dementia 28 614 79.6 29.4%/70.6% Using ICD codes
Chen et al21 Taiwan National Health Insurance Case-control. Randomised sample data of one million patients who made claims from insurance Eye disease 4097 50 y AMD 60.9%/39.1% Alzheimer's disease ICD codes with diagnoses of Alzheimer's Disease ICD codes with diagnoses of AMD, Diabetic retinopathy and Glaucoma Cumulative IR of 1.22% ADE among eye disease group vs 0.04% among controls AMD, DR and Glaucoma were asso with an increased Moderate
2016 Research database (HIRD) Controls 20 745 DR 52.9%/47.1% HR for DR 39.31 (4.79, 332.67), HR for AMD 36.94 (4.62, 295.46), HR for Glau 34.08 (13.37, 86.84) risk of Alzheimer's disease
Glaucoma 45.9%/54.1%
Chen et al22 US (NHANES and NHATS) Cross-sectional analysis of two datasets: 1999–2002 NHANES data and 2011–2015 NHATS data NHANES 2975 72 48%/52% Cognition NHANES: Cog testing done using Digit symbol substitution test (DSST). </=28 indicated poor cognition NHANES: Dist-Snellen VA chart, Near- 5-linr near vision card NHANES: Dist VI b=−5.1 (-8.6,–1.6), OR 2.8 (1.1, 6.7), Near VI b=−3.8*, OR 1.7*, Subj VI b=−5.3*, OR 2.7* Yes, VI significantly associated with worse cognitive fn Moderate
2017 NHATS 30202 NA 42%/58% NHATS: Probable/possible dementia vs No dementia based on NHATS classification scheme (self-report) NHATS: Vision tested via questionnaires NHATS: Subj Near VI: OR 2.6 (2.2–3.1), Subj Dist VI: OR 3.9 (3.4–4.4)
Chriqui23 Canada Longitudinal cohort 150 86.7 27%/73% Vision MMSE Dist vision- Snellen chart, 6 m. VI was Vn<6/12 Presenting VI: 37.3 (29.1–46.1) 37.3% of dementia participants had VI. Moderate
2017 Near vision- Topcon paragraph/lighthouse VI after refraction: 20.1 (13.7–27.9) Just prevalence study, no correlation tested
De Celis et al25 US (Hurria et al. JCO 2011 & 2016) Cross-sectional analysis of 2 prospective studies 750 Median age 72 (65-94) No info Cognition Blessed OMC test (>11 on this test) self-reported visual impairment (fair, poor or blind) OR for association between VI and Cognition deficit. Older pts with cancer and hearing/visual impairment Moderate
2017 Univariate model: 2.0 (0.8–4.7), Multivariate model: 1.9 (0.75–5) at higher risk of funtional and cognitive deficits
de Kok et al26 New Zealand (Life and Living in Advanced Age: A Cross-sectional baseline data 661 Maori: 82.3 40%/60% Cognitive decline MMSE-blind version, cognitive test for the visually impaired Acuity: ETDRS Generalised linear models and structural equation modelling No direct association found in this population Moderate
2017 Cohort Study in New Zealand (LiLACS NZ) Non-Maori: 84.6 47%/53% Maori: Dis VA (logmar) b=0.103 (-0.21,0.42), Self reported VI b=0.110 (-0.030, 0.251)
Non-Maori: Dis VA (logmar) b=0.197 (-0.12, 0.51), Self-report VI b=0.065 (-0.056, 0.187)
Elliott et al29 US Cross-sectional cohort 238 No info 26%/74% Vision MMSE Dist VA: ETDRS, Near VA: Lighthouse near VA card. VI<20/40 one eye β MMSE in Multiple linear Regression for Predicting Vn; Dist VA: −0.015, Near VA: −0.013 both(p 0.00) Cognitive status contributed to the prediction of VI Moderate
2015 Mars CS to assess CS. Score worse than 1.50 in one eye Contrast sen: 0.17 (p0.00)
Elliott et al30 US Longitudinal case-control 78 REC: 79.2 23.1%/76.9% Cognition Self-report and MMSE Distance: ETDRS Intervention group: MMSE baseline 20.2 (4.4), follow-up 19.4 (4.8), p=0.05 Vision-enhancing interventions did not lead to short Moderate
2009 64 Delayed corrc: 78 25%/75% Near: Lighthouse Near VA Test Control group: MMSE baseline 21.7 (4.5), follow-up 20.5 (5.5), p=0.015 term improvements in physical function/cognitive status in sample.
30 Cataract Sx: 81 26.7%/73.3% Pre&post-intervention measures of Phy fn &cognitive status compared within treatmnt groups paired t-tests
15 No cat sx: 87 13.3%/86.7%
Elyashiv et al31 US (The Religious Orders Study and The Memory snd Ageing Project) Longitudinal cohort study of ageing and AD 2716 78.13 28.6%/71.4% Cognition Global cognitive scale (GCS), summary of raw scored of 19 tests incl episodic, semantic and working mem Tested with both eyes open with a card held at 14 inches and measured Mixed model for assoc with global cog score: VA b=−0.03312 (p<0.0001) Significant positive correlation between GCS and VA Moderate
2014 Scores converted, avergd and normalised-categorised into no, mild, mild CI+other diag, AD and AD+diag at 7 increments from 20/40 or better to 20/400 or worse Pearson and spearmann correlation coeff to assess relationship btwn GCS and VA
Elliott et al30 US Cross-sectional 382 Range: 60 to<=100 No Impairmnt 26.8/73.2 Vision MMSE Acuity- Lighthouse near VA test Multiple linear regression used to estimate assoc btwn vision and cognition VI affected HRQoL both with and without CI Moderate
2009 VI only 5.9%/94.1% NHVQoL, mean: No VI+CI=72.8, VI only=75.2, CI only=76.5, VI+CI=65.2. p=0.02
CI only 16.7%/83.3%
VI+CI: 20.4%/79.6%
Feeney et al32 Ireland (The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing) Cross-sectional cohort 4453 fourth quartile 62.8 42.5/57.5 Cognition MMSE, MoCA, Neuropsyh battery, CAPI for word-recall, CAMDEX-R for picture memory Acuity:ETDRS, MPOD measured using Macular metrics densitometer Multivariate regression to analyse assoc btwn Cog test performance and MPOD(continuous variable) Lower MPOD associated with poorer performance in MMSE & MoCA Moderate
2013 third quartile 62.4 46.3/53.7 Pt was asked if diagnosed with ARMD and Diabetes MMSE: b=0.48 (0.06, 0.90) p=0.026, MoCA: b=0.83 (0.15, 1.50) p=0.016, Memory: OR=2.24 (1.2, 4.15)p0.01
second quartile 62.2 53.9/46.1
first quartile 62.3 53.8/46.2
Formiga et al36 Spain (NonaSantfeliu population-based study) Cross-sectional design 186 93.06 23.5/76.5 Cognition MEC (Spanish version of the MMSE), Functional status: Lawton-Brody Index (LI) and Barthel Index (BI) Acuity: Snellen Eye test T-test and chi-square test. MEC (±SD): group with visual deficit:16.5±11, w/o visual deficit:23.6±11, p<0.001 Functional status and cognition significantly asso with sensory Moderate
2006 Lower LI was asso with: VI OR=1.86 (1.44, 2.39) and combined impairment OR=1.995 (1.32, 3.01) Impairment
Friedman et al37 US (The Salisbury Eye Evaluation in Nursing Home Cross-sectional 656 83.4 25/75 Vision MMSE ETDRS charts or Lea symbols and grating acuity tests using Teller cards Bland-Altman plot to measure how strongly grating acuity and recognition acuity relate to one another. Grating acuity testing appears to be useful in Moderate
2002 Groups (SEEING)) MMSE (5-point decline)with Teller acuity cards: OR=2.67 (2.14, 3.31). Teller and recognition ICC=0.79 cognitively impaired individuals
Frost et al38 Australia (Australian Imaging Biomarkers and Lifestyle Cross-sectional case control 123 AD 70.2 59.1/40.9 Vision (ARMD) MMSE and PET scan Digital, non-stereoscopic retinal colour photographs, both eyes with a Logistic regression: Medium Drusen:(N (%)): CN: 13 (13), AD: 9 (41), OR: 4.69 (1.67–13.13) A logistic model for early AMD found a Moderate
2016 study of ageing (AIBL)) CN 71.3 39.6/60.4 Canon CR-1 Non-Mydriatic retinal camera with digital Canon camera at the back Early AMD:(N (%)): CN: 3 (3.0), AD: 8 (36), OR: 18.67 (4.42–78.80) significant association with AD diagnosis (p<0.0001)
Grader (masked) evaluated images for signs of ARMD
Fuller et al39 US (The American Community Survey (ACS)) Cross-sectional survey data 7 210 535 61.31 47.1/52.9 Cognition Self-report: Because of a physical, mental or emotional condition, does this person have difficulty Self report: serious visual impairment- is this person blind or does Cog Imp: NSI reference group, SHI: 45-64y: 3.55–3.67, 65-79y: 2.86–2.95, 80y+: 1.81–1.86, SVI alone: 45-64y: Cognitive difficulty greatly associated with sensory impairment when Moderate
2018 concentrating, remembering or making decisions? Yes/No he/she have serious difficulty seeing even when wearing glasses?yes/no 4.42–4.57, 65-79y: 4.71–4.91, 80y+: 2.33–2.44, DSI: 45-64y: 12.03–13.77, 65-79y: 11.19–12.84, 80y+:4.69–5.35 compared with NSI, esp greatest with SVI alone.
Garin et al40 Spain (COURAGE) Cross-sectional cohort 50–64: 1760 57 47.7/52.3 Vision Global standardised score from five performance tests: learning and short-term mem, attention & working Obj: Snellen, Subjective: two questions to the participant, 1. how much Asso btwn poor VA and Cognition (OR): Dist VA: 1.47 (1.17–1.86), Near VA: 1.72 (1.46–2.02) Objective and subjective poor distance and near VA Moderate
2014 >65: 1865 74.9 44.95/55.05 mem and language. Lower score indicates worse cognitive functioning diffculty seeing object or recognising at 20 m 2. at arm's length Subjective distance VA: 2.05 (1.44–2.90), Subjective near VA: 2.96 (1.92–4.55) were associated with worse cognitive functioning.
Gaynes et al41 US (Rush memory and ageing project (1997–2007)) Cross-sectional cohort 714 VI present: 82 26.1/73.9 Cognition Global cog fn summary contructed from 19 neuropsychological tests that assessed episodic, semantic, Near VA: Rosenbaum Pocket Vision Screener positioned 14 inches from X2 test, pooled t-test for equal variance. Divided analytic cohort into VI present and VI not present. Linear reg Each unit higher in neuroticism level worsened association Moderate
2014 VI not present: 78.8 23.6/76.4 working memory, perceptual speed and visuospatial ability. Raw scores converted to Z-scores & averag the eye. VI was defined as BCVA<20/40 Global cog fn: VI b=−0.147, SE=0.086, p=0.09, Neuroticism b=−0.001, p=0.04, VIxNeurot b=−0.017, SE=0.005, p0.001 between vision impairment and lower global cognitive func
Guthrie et al42 Canada (Resident Assessment Instrument for Home Care) Cross-sectional study Home care: 291 824 82.8 38.9/61.1 Physical, social and emotional Cognitive Performance Scale (CPS) which has four terms pertaining to short-term memory, independence Data from RAI-HC, particpants interviewed on the use of glasses HC: CI+VI highest rate of procedural mem problems (56.1%) and highest prevalence of depression (28.2%) CI+DSI had highest rate of functional impairments, communication Moderate
2018 (RAI-HC) Longterm care: 110 578 86.9 30.5/69.5 functioning in eating, expressive communication and decision making. Scale of 0–6, intact to very severe impairmnt 0 adequate Vn and four severely impaired(can see only lights and colours) LTC: All three impairments showed highest rates on indicators of delirium. problems and difficulty understanding others
Hoferl44 Nordic Research on Ageing Study (NORA) Cross-sectional study 1041 75 y 42.7/57.3 Cognition, Vision WAIS-R- Digit Symbol test, Raven's Progressive Matrices- test of inductive reasoning, Acuity: Computerised refractometer (Topcon RMA2300). Of the correlations with the set of cognitive variables, the highest correlations were with corrected vision no consistent associations were found across sensory, balance, Moderate
2003 Word Fluency Task, The Digit Span Forward and Backward test, Reaction time to vis/audi stimuli Composite scores derived using avg of right and left vision scores between.20 and.40 (visual choice reaction time), with the highest asso on visuomotor performance tests. strength, and cognitive domains.
Jefferis et al45 UK (Newcastle 85+Cohort study) Cross-sectional study 839 Diag cataract: 85.5 30/70 Cognition Standardised MMSE, Mmblind (blind version) Review of family practice records, any pre-existing diagnosis of glauco, Diagnosed Glau: 1.76 (1.05, 2.95), Diagnosed Glau or drops: 1.73 (1.05, 2.85) Association between recorded glaucoma diagnosis and cognitive Moderate
2013 Diag Glaucoma: 85.4 36/64 cataract, cataract surgery (uni/ or bilateral) sight impaired registration scores and record of previous cataract surgery & better cognition
Luo et al48 China (Second National Sample Survey on Disability) Cross-sectional study 250 752 Total: 72.9 47.5/52.5 Cognition Dementia ascertained using combo of self-report/family member report and on-site psychiatrist eval Acuity: Trained Ophthalmologist assessed VI according to WHO BCVA Dementia: Only VI- 1.54 (1.27–1.86), p<0.001, Only HI- 1.04 (0.88–1.22), DSI- 1.63 (1.25–2.11), p<0.001 VI & DSI were more likely to have severe to extremely severe Moderate
2018 With dementia: 77.2 38.6/61.4 Questionnaire tested: poor memory, diff concentrating, diff controlling emotions, strange language/beha criteria (low vision: 0.05≤BCVA ≤ 0.29; blindness: no light perception dementia than those without sensory impairment.
Positive on any one- then tyested by psychiatrist. Disablity diagnosis based on WHO DASII (score>52) ≤BCVA < 0.05, VF less than 10 degrees; the betterseeing eye)
Rovner et al52 US (AMD Trial) Cross-sectional study 241 82.8 36.5/63.5 Vision function Animal Fluency Test-brief assessment of cognitive function relevant to the completion of daily activities Acuity: BCVA using ETDRS chart, NEI-VFQ near vision subscale Predictors of Visual function: VA b=−1.93(−2.59 to −1.27),<0.001, Animal fluency b=0.054 (0.019 to 0.090),.003 Visual ability was highly correlated with VA. Multivariate Moderate
2011 Range 65 and older Name as many animals as possible in 60 secs. Requires semantic knowledge, speed mental processing CS using Pelli-Robson chart CS b=0.20 (−0.210 to 0.610),.33, PHQ-9 severity: −0.032 (−0.100 to 0.035),.35, Age b= −0.008 (−0.033 to 0.016) model revealed coping startegies and cog fn contributed to Near Vn
Spierer et al54 US Cross-sectional study 190 81.6 30.5/69.5 Cognition MMSE for the visually impaired (removed eight items from the original MMSE) max score of 22 Corrected near VA was tested using the Jaeger chart. Refraction using Asso VA & High MMSE blind score: Bad near VA (>J3): 1.0, good near VA (<J3); OR=3.18 (1.57–6.43) p0.001 Good VA and Wearing reading glasses were significantly associated Moderate
2016 Range 75–101 Autorefractometer with high MMSE-blind score
Varin et al55 Canada Cross-sectional case-cohort 303 AMD 83.6 30.2/69.8 Total cognitive activities Victoria Activity Questionnaire, which is a 70-item survey assessing older adults' participation in various Acuity: ETDRS chart, VF: Humphrey frequency doubling Total cognitive activities: Normal vision b=0 (ref), AMD: −4.19 (−5.96,–2.43) *p<0.05. Patients with AMD and glaucoma participated in fewer cognitive Moderate
2017 Glaucoma 77.5 40.9/59.1 cognitive activities over the past 2 years. Ex. Gardening, exercise, prep meals, doing housework, etc technology full-threshold N-30 testing each eye. Medical chart reviewed Glaucoma: −1.80 (−3.34,–0.26) *p<0.05. activities compared with older adults with normal vision potentially
Normal 72.8 48.3/51.7 Cognition was tested with the MMSE-blind version for diagnosis of AMD and any co-existing eye disease putting them at risk for cognitive impairment
Gussekloo et al57 Netherland (Leiden 85+study) Cross-sectional cohort 459 85 34/66 Cognition MMSE, The 12-Word Learning Test was used as a visual test of long-term memory. Cognitive speed Acuity: ETDRS chart MMSE and VI: beta=−1.2 (-1.6 to -0.84), Immediate word-learning test beta=−1.3 (-1.8 to -0.69) VI was associated with lower MMSE scores. Increasing VI was asso with Moderate
2005 was measured with the Letter Digit Coding Test (processing speed) Delayed word-learning test beta=−0.62 (-0.9 to -0.35), Letter digit coding test beta=−2.1 (-2.8 to -1.4) woth poorer scored on memory and cog speed.
Stroop test beta=4.7 (1.1 to 8.4)
Hajek et al58 Germany (German Study on Ageing, Cognition and Dementia in Primary Care Patients) Longitudinal cohort 2394 82.5 34.2/65.8 Cognition Cognitive activities included reading, writing, solving crossword puzzles, memory training, games Patient graded their vision on three level Likert scale Onset of mild visual impairment: beta (SE)=−0.065 (0.026) Linear fixed-effects regression showed that the onset of severe Moderate
2016 (eg, card games, board games), playing music, and social engagement (eg, in church, volunteering, in a club) (with optical aid if necessary) as no impairment, mild, severe or profound VI Onset of severe or profound visual impairment: beta (SE)=−0.376 (0.062) VI was associated with a decline in physical & cognitive function score in the total sample
Hidalgo et al59 Spain Cross-sectional cohort 1160 73.3 44.1/55.9 Vision Short portable Mental Status questionnaire Acuity: Essilor visiotest instrument with snellen optotypes VA <6/18 in the better eye −0.344 (−0.392 to −0.295), Self-reported vision: average/poor/very poor Using multiple regression analysis, the variables associated with VF status Moderate
2009 Self reported vision as very good, good, average, poor and very poor. −0.077 (−0.101 to −0.054), Dependence in activities of daily living: −0.121 (−0.160 to −0.081), Cognitive impairment −0.073 (−0.117 to −0.029) were: visual impairment, self-reported poor vision, dependence in daily activities, cognitive
impairment, depressive symptoms, female gender and older age
Pham TQ et al63 Australia (The Blue Mountains Eye Study) Cross-sectional case control 3509 Late AMD: 79 34/66 Cognition Modified MMSE: omitted vision-dependent items, with a max score of 22. Acuity: LogMAR chart, Macula photo using Zeiss FF3 fundus camera OR for MMSE 24–27 and: NO AMD 1, Late AMD 2.3 (1.1–5.0), Early AMD 1.0 (0.7–1.4) Significant association found between Late AMD and cognitive impairment Moderate
2006 Early AMD: 75.1 38.1/61.9 Amd lesions were assesed from the photos based on Wisconsin AMD grading system For MMSE 0–23 and: NO AMD 1, Late AMD3.7 (1.3–10.6), Early AMD 1.4 (0.8–2.6)
No AMD: 65.7 43.7/56.3
Uhlmann et al64 US Cross-sectional case control 174 77 42/58 Cognition MMSE Acuity: was measured with the Snellen and Rosenbaum methods for far and near vision. Relative Odds for Dementia of Far-vision Impairment: 1.9 (95% CI=0.8–4.6), RR of dementia and near Vn: Visual impairment is associated with both an increased Moderate
1991 20/100-20/200 1.5 (0.5–4.7),>=20/200 1.8 (0.5–6.1), RR of dementia and far Vn: 20/70-20/100 1.5 (0.3–6.1), risk and an increased clinical severity of Alzheimer's disease
>=20/200 1.5 (0.3–6.0) Consistent with the hypotheses that VI excerbates Cog dysfucntion in dementia
Guthrie et al65 four countries Cross-sectional Canada: Comparison: 138 650, DSI 48 210 NA F 67.2, 67.9 Cognition CPS, captures issues with memory, independence in eating and decision-making inter RAI assessment inlcudes items measuring the presence of impairments individuals with DSI were more likely than all others to have moderate to severe cognitive impairment (between 3.8% and 9.0% higher rate), Yes. DSI significantly associated with CI Moderate
2016 US: comparison 60 971, DSI 6577 F 66.8, 68.6 (Established validity against MMSE) in vision. The vision item captures the person's ability to see close objects in adequate light while using their typical assistive device. Scored on a five-point scale where 0=adequate, 1=impaired, 2=moderately impaired, 3=highly impaired and 4=severely impaired highly compromised independence with ADLs (5.2% to 11.4% higher), instrumental ADLs (8.8% to 21.4% higher). Those with DSI were not more likely to experience social isolation
Belgium: comparison 500, DSI 256 F 74.9, 78.9
Finland: comparison 4765 DSI 1358 F 70.9, 76.2
Harrabi et al66 Canada Cross-sectional cohort 420 AMD 82.5 25/75 Cognition MMSE Acuity: ETDRS chart with illuminated light box at 2 m, at 1 m if patient could Model 1*: Binocular Logmar acuity, per 0.1 unit, −0.11 (-0.18,–0.04), People with AMD, Fuch's corneal dystrophy, and glaucoma had lower cognitive Moderate
2015 Fuch's 78.5 17/83 not see at 2 m. Letter by letter scoring done, converted to logMAR Model 2*: Log CS, per 0.1 unit, 1.40, (0.72, 2.13) scores, on average, than controls (p<0.05).
Glaucoma 76.6 42/58 CS measured using Pelli-Robinson chart 1m Model 3*: VF in better eye, per 1 dB, 0.04, (-0.003, 0.08) Scores were between 0.7 and 0.8 units lower than the control group
Control 74.0 41/59 VF: Humphrey frequency doubling technology (FDT)
Holmen et al68 Sweden (Kungsholmen project) Case-control Cog imapired 55 82 Loneliness, but measured interaction between MMSE Acuity: Snellen, self-report questions: Do you have any problems with your sight? Yes or No” was used to assess the problems There were no significant differences in the cognitive groups between subjects with slight to moderate NO. In a multiple regression analysis, higher MMSE score and visual improvement were significantly related to lower levels of self-reported loneliness among the elderly with their cognition intact, but not Moderate
1994 Cog intact 92 83 Cognition & vision habitual VA (ie, those who could read newspapers with glasses and visually orient themselves among the subjects with impaired cognition.
without difficulty), and subjects with pronounced to severe visual impairment with residual vision (x2=2.28, p=0.13). The same differences were found
when corrected VA was compared analytically between the cognitive groups (x2=1.15, p=0.28)
Su et al69 Taiwan (Taiwan National Health Insurance programme) Cross-sectional cohort Glaucoma 6509 59.4 45.5/56.5 Cognition Dementia patients enrolled using ICD codes Glaucoma cohort formed enrolling patients who were newly diagnosed with it HR=1.13 (1.01–1.27) The patients with glaucoma exhibited a significantly higher risk of Moderate
2016 Control 26 036 59.2 42.4/54.6 dementia than the individuals without glaucoma did (HR
(HR)¼1.13, 95% CI (CI)¼1.01–1.27)
Miyata et al71 Japan (Fujiwara-kyo Study) Cross-sectional cohort 2764 76.3 52.6/47.4 Cognition MMSE Acuity, Landolt ring chart at 5 m, converted to logMAR. refractive errors were measured by an autoref/keratometer OR for MCI: no cataract surgery 1.00 (ref) / cataract surgery 0.79 (0.64–0.97) p 0.025 The subjects who had prior cataract surgery had significantly lower OR of having MCI Moderate
2018 A prior cataract surgery was determined by the selfadministered questionnaire OR for dementia: no cataract surgery 1.00 (ref) / cataract surgery 1.20 (0.64–0.97) p 0.36 Cataract surgery may be important in reducing the risk of developing MCI but not for dementia independently
Ong et al72 Singapore (Singapore Malay Eye Study (SiMES)) Cross-sectional cohort 1032 Cognitive dysfunction 70.5 24/76 Cognition Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT) Acuity: number chart at a distance of 4 m converted to logMAR. VI logMAR>0.3 in the better eye Cog Dysfunction OR: Model 2 :Myopia 1.78 (1.02–3.10) Hyperopia 1.11 (0.68–1.80) Emmetropia 1.0 Yes. Compared with individuals with emmetropia, persons with myopia were Moderate
2013 No Cog dysfunction 67.7 66.5/33.5 [cognitive dysfunction was defined as a score less than or equal to 6 of 10 for those with 0 to 6 years of formal education Model 3 : Myopia 1.86 (1.01–3.42) Hyperopia 0.92 (0.54–1.55) Emmetropia 1.0 almost twice as likely to have cognitive dysfunction
and less than or equal to 8 of 10 for those with more than 6 years of formal education.]
Soler et al73 France Cross-sectional cohort 1648 82.6 35.6/64.4 Vision MMSE Acuity. Snellen decimal chart for distant vision, Parinaud chart for near vision model one for distant vision: MMSE OR (CI) 0.94 (0.92–0.97) p<0.001 Yes. Results show that visual impairment is independently associated Moderate
2016 ADL, IADL, Fried score, SPPB class (Short Physical Performance Battery), Amsler grid testing model two for near vision: MMSE OR (CI) 0.92 (0.89–0.94) p<0.001 with lower educational level, cognitive impairment, and lower ADL-assessed autonomy
Sun et al74 China Cross-sectional cohort 4123 67.5 48.8/51.2 Cognition AMT Objective refraction was measured using an autorefractor (Canon RK-5) OR of cog dysfunction for myopia: Before propensity score matching, OR 1.98 (1.61–2.44) Results of this PSM analysis support a small, but positive association of Moderate
2016 Spherical equivalent (SE)(Myopia: a SE of less than −0.50 dioptre (D) in the right eye. High myopia: a SE of less than −6.00 D.) After matching: OR 1.31 (1.00–1.71). Multivariate logistic regression myopia with cognitive dysfunction among elderly Chinese in China
model on the association between myopia and cognitive dysfunction, OR (95% CI):
Myopia (Yes vs No) 1.52 (1.23–2.06), Age-related cataract (Yes vs No) 2.06 (1.57–2.98)
Zheng et al75 US (The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Study) Longitudinal cohort 2520 73.5 42/58 Cognition MMSE Acuity. ETDRS chart refraction was performed on participantswith Worse baseline VA was associated with worse baseline MMSE score Worse baseline VA was associated with worse baseline MMSE score Moderate
2018 20/32 VA orworse using a forced-choice procedure. (r = −0.226; 95% CI, −0.291 to −0.16; p<0.001). The rate of worsening VA was associated with The rate of worsening VA was associated with a significant
Presenting binocular distanceVAwas converted to logMAR with a higher score indicating worse VA. the rate of declining MMSE score (r = −0.139; 95% CI, −0.261 to −0.017; p=0.03). the rate of declining MMSE score
Ward et al76 US (Study of Osteoporotic Fractures) Longitudinal cohort 1352 77.7 0/100 Vision Global cognition (3 MS), verbal memory (California Verbal Learning Test II, short form (CVLT)), CS, using a VISTECH (Hartford, CT) VCTS 6500 wall chart and light mete OR of MCI/dementia for lowest quartile of baseline CS These data support an association between impaired CS and future MCI/ dementia. Moderate
2018 executive function (Trails B, Digit Span Forward, Digit Span Backward), and semantic memory (category and verbal fluency) Self-reported AMD, glaucoma, and cataract compared with women in the highest quartile: OR 2.16 (95% CI=1.58–2.96)
Clinical adjudication if person was positive in the above tests. OR of MCI/dementia for every 10 point decrease in CS:
Mitoku K, Masaki N et al78 Japan (Gujo City Long-Term Care Insurance database) Cross-sectional cohort 1754 80.89/82.42 34.5/65.5 Cognition The assessment measures include communication, short-term memory, Acuity: No chart name provided Logistic regression: OR of CI was 1.389 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.85) in those with VI Yes. Supports the relationship between DSI and CI, increased risk of mortality in thise with DSI & CI. Moderate
2016 location awareness and understanding of daily tasks, remembering own name and date of birth, and recognising the Other: Vision at baseline five levels, “normal sight”, “able to see chart at 1 m” 1.581 (95 % CI 1.24 to 2.01) in those with HI, and 2.349 (95 % CI 1.79 to 3.09) in those with DSI
season of year in addition to 18 problem behaviours able to see chart in front, “very little sight”, “indeterminable”
CI classified as none, mild, moderate, severe
Jefferis JM et al79 UK Longitudinal, cohort 112 80.7 45/55 Cognition The ACE-R (which includes the MMSE), is scored from 0 (worst cognition) to 100 (best cognition); logMAR VA in the better eye corrected with up-to-date refraction and/or pinhole Group, Mean±SD:Baseline, Postop, 1 Year. P Value*: 3-Way†, Baseline vs Postop, Baseline vs 1 Year, Postop vs 1 Year Significant improvements in ACE-R scores were seen between baseline and 1 year Moderate
2015 38 of these points pertain to vision-dependent items and 62 to vision-independent items Normal (n=46): 92.5±2.8, 92.6±3.8, 93.7±3.4, 0.018, 0.9, 0.009, 0.004::: Mildly impaired cognition (n=22): 84.5±1.4, 84.8±4.3, 88.0±3.5,<0.001, 0.75,<0.001 0.002 postoperatively (95% CI for improvement, 0.5–2.8; P Z.005). Improved
Moderately impaired cognition (n=23): 72.6±8.7, 73.6±10.4, 73.3±14.4, 0.75, --, --,-- cognition did not correlate with improved VA (r Z 0.13, P Z.22)
All participants (n=91): 85.6±9.5, 85.9±10.0, 87.2±11.4, 0.004, 0.45, 0.005, 0.006, *p<0.05 statistically significant
Lindenberger et al81 Germany (BASE (Berlin Ageing Study)) Longitudinal, cohort 516 85 NA Cognition MMSE Acuity: Snellen decimal units. Close VA (close vision) was measured separately for the left and the right eye with a standard reading table presented at reading distance. Distance VA (distant vision) was assessed binocularly with a reading table presented to the participants at a minimum distance of 2.5 metres Multivariate Multilevel Modelling Results With Control for Age, Time to Death, and Risk of Dementia Construct, Mean (Level, Linear change, Quadratic change), Variance (Level, Linear change), Age, Dementia status, Age X Linear Change, Residual variance. Contrary to expectations, the correlations between cognitive and sensory declines were only moderate in size, underscoring the need to delineate both domain-general and function-specific mechanisms ofbehavioral when controlling for age at first measurement, distance to death, and risk of dementia senescence Moderate
2009 Close vision: 47.33 (0.30),–1.37 (0.11), ---, 34.17 (2.95), 0.83 (0.16),–0.44 (0.04), ---, −0.03 (0.01), 25.87 (1.42)
Distant vision: 48.47 (0.32),–0.56 (0.11), ---, 28.14 (3.17), 1.20 (0.25),–0.59 (0.04), ---, ---, 44.79 (2.45)
Hong et al82 Australia (Blue Mountain Eye Study) Longitudinal, cohort 2334 No Sensory impairment 66.9 (7.4), No SI 58.4/41.6 Cognition MMSE Acuity: Distance VA at 244 cm followed by pinhole acuity (VA was recorded as the number of letters read correctly) If no letters could be read count fingers, hand movements, light perception, or no light perception association between Decline>=3 MMSE blind score and visual impairment (adjusted for age and sex). OR after 5 years: Visual impairment 0.84 95% CI 0.40 to 1.79 DSI 1.41 95% CI 0.54 to 3.72 after 10 years: Visual impairment 1.09 95% CI 0.52 to 2.30 DSI 1.15 95% CI 0.28 to 4.73 No. The presence of VI, HL or DSI was not associated with possible cognitive decline over 5 years or 10 years. Moderate
2016 Visual impairment 74.3 (8.4), VI 65.8/34.2 There were no changes to these findings after adjustment for other potential confounder
Dual impairment 80.4 (7.0) Dual impairment 57/43
Moderate
Mandas et al85 Italy Case-Control 1168 78.4 29/71 Cognition MMSE Acuity: Snellen Chart Total(n=1168), Control1 (n=436), All types of dementia (n=732), MCI (n=181), AD (n=230), MD (n=126), VD (n=195)
2014 IOP, fundus examination under slit-lamp and fundu photograph All vision disorders: No, n=297, n=433, n=117, n=135, n=68, n=113 yes, n=139, n=299, n=64, n=95, n=58, n=82 χ2, 9.37, 0.70, 5.87, 8.60,6.12 P-value, 0.002, 0.40, 0.015,0.003, 0.013 OD (95% CI), 1.5 (1.1–1.9), 1.2 (0.8–1.7), 1.5 (1.1–2.1), 1.8 (1.2–2.7), 1.5 (1.1–2.2) Subjects with any type of age-related vision disorders(n D438), cataract,
Macular degeneration, glaucoma, and diabetic retinopathy, were more likely be depressed
and had significantly lower MMSE scores than Control 2
Mendola et al86 US Case-Control 188 NA NA Vision Blessed Dementia Scale (BDS) Acuity: Snellen, CS: two-alternative forced-choice format, Test, Prevalence in AD, Correlation with BDS, % variance from BDS. The results indicate that visual dysfunction, especially on Backward Masking, is a common sign of AD. Moderate
1995 Stereopsis: binocular disparity stereopsis, as a clue to depth perception(Stereo Optical) Backward Pattern Masking: 58% r=0.22; p=0.106; df=55, 13%, Gollin Incomplete Pictures: 30%, r=0.33; p=0.03; df=17, 6%
funduscopy, evaluation of fixation, pupillary function, extraocular movement, Luria Mental Rotation: 39%, rb=0.74; p=0.004; df=36, 13%
Backward Masking. Gollin Incomplete Pictures. City University Colour Vision. Log CS at one cpd: 39%, rb=0.69; p=0.002; df=17, 52%, Log CS at 2cpd: 6%, rb=0.55; p=0.022; df=17, 7%
Luria Mental Rotation. Moeny Road Map. Local speed discrimination and Global motion detection. Critical Flicker fusion. Money Road Map: 29%, rb=0.37; p=0.028; df=35, 17%
Magalhães et al88 Brazil Cross-sectional cohort 466 71.4 44.4/55.6 Cognition Cambridge Cognitive Examination (CAMCOG) Self-report logistic regression model for dementia: Yes. Study showed strong association between dementia and sight-impairment Moderate
2008 Dementia was diagnosed in individuals who fulfilled CAMDEX criteria for definitive, probable or possible dementia through a combination of clinical criteria, organicity indices ≥5 and CAMCoG <80. sight impairment OR (95% CI): 1.83 (1.15–2.91)
Pvalue 0.011
Ong et al89 Singapore (SiMES) Cross-sectional cohort 1179 with cognitive dysfunction: 71.2 21/79 Cognition The AMT is a 10-question test of general cognitive function Acuity: LogMAR number chart (lighthouse international) Age-related eye disease, model 1, model 2, model 3. Moderate
2012 Without cognitive dysfunction: 68.0 67.7/33.3 Items assess orientation (three points), semantic knowledge (1point), episodic memory (three points), delayed recall Cataracts were assessed from lens photographs, Glaucoma diagnosed and classified using International Society Geographical and Epidemiological Ophthalmology scheme based on gonioscopy Cataract: 1.52 (1.02–2.27), 1.42 (0.93–2.16), 1.44 (0.94–2.22), AMD: 1.71 (0.89–3.29), 1.44 (0.71–2.91), 1.36 (0.34–5.45) Yes. VI due to cataract (OR=2.75; 95% CI, 1.35 to 5.63)
(one point), picture naming (one point), and attention (one point) Moderate or severe DR: 2.43 (1.13–5.20), 2.26 (1.02–5.00), 5.57 (1.56–19.91) were more likely to have cognitive dysfunction. Only moderate to severe diabetic retinopathy was independently associated with cognitive dysfunction
Glaucoma: 1.68 (0.81–3.46), 1.61 (0.75–3.45), 2.09 (0.52–8.31)
Mangione et al90 US Cross-sectional cohort 472 73 40/60 Cognition TICS questionnaire Acuity: Snellen (results were transformed into percentages of functional central multivariate linear regression, percent increase in ODDS of abnormal TICS score (95% CI): Moderate
1993 vision loss following the formula outlined in the Physician's Desk Reference for Ophthalmology) binocular vision loss(per 10% decline in vision) −9 (−23,9), percent field loss (per one category decline) 13 (-13,48) cataract (per eye) 18 (-12,58) ocular miotics 37 (-17,126) No. An association between low TICS score and visual disorders were not seen
VF: Humphrey field analyser
Wittich et al93 Canada (COMPASS-ND study) Longitudinal, cohort 109 72.94 No info Cognition MoCA Reading acuity (MNRead) and CS (Mars Test) Individuals with AD had significantly lower CS than those with MCI and SCI (p=0.04, ω2=0.04;), after adjusting for age, sex and education. No differences in VA were observed p=0.46, ω2=0.004. Yes. Declines seen in CS in individuals with AD relative to those with MCI and SCI. Moderate
2019 Study also observed higher rates of reduced reading acuity in the AD and MCI groups relative to those reported the general population.
Brenowitz et al94 US (Health ABC Study) Longitudinal, cohort 1810 76.7 39.4/60/6 Cognition Dementia was defined as meeting one or more of the following criteria through study Bailey-Lovie distance VA test, Pelli-Robson CS Multivariable model for incident dementia with VA: HR=1.26 (0.90–1.77), CS: HR=1.11 (0.88–1.38) No. Vision impairment and CS independently was not significantly associated with incident dementia Moderate
2019 Year 15 (2011–2012):(a) hospitalisation with dementia as a primary or secondary diagnosis,
(b) documented use of dementia medication, or (c) clinically meaningful Modified MMSE (3 MS)
decline from Health ABC baseline (1.5 SD, race-stratified)
Davies-Kershaw et al95 UK (English Longitudinal Study of Ageing) Longitudinal cohort 7685 NA 44/56 Cognition three methods to identify individuals with dementia: a physician diagnosis of dementia Rate their eyesight (using glasses or corrective lenses as usual) Cross-sectional analysis using Wave seven measures adjusted for covariates: compared with normal VA, moderate OR=2.04 (1.36–3.07) Yes. Older adults with vision impairment have higher rates of dementia crosssectionally (all ages) and are at greater risk of incident dementia longitudinally (<70 only) Moderate
2918 Wave 7 that the participant or a caregiver reported between Wave 3 (2006–7) and 7 (2014–15); as excellent, very good, good, fair, poor, or registered blind poor OR=4.02 (2.64–6.13) p<0.001
a score less than 3.5 on the adaptive Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) Combined groups into three categories for analysis (excellent or very good=normal, Longitudinal analysis using Wave two measures individuals in the younger group (50–68) and with moderate (HR=1.78, 95% CI=1.04–3.04) and poor (HR=3.60, 95%CI=1.10–11.78) selfrated vision were at greater risk of developing dementia than those with normal self-rated vision
or prescriptions for anticholinesterase inhibitors, N-methyl-D-aspartic acid receptor antagonists, good or fair=moderate, poor or registered or legally blind=poor or blind)
and other relevant medication (galantamine, rivastigmine, memantine, donepezil, tacrine) to indicate dementia Self-rated vision measure from Wave 7 (2014–15) for cross-sectional analysis and from Wave 2 (2004–05) for the longitudinal analysis
Gui-Ying Cao China (China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study) Longitudinal, cohort 7269 60.2 56.2/43.8 Cognition Episodic memory (measured as the average of immediate and delayed recall scores of ten Chinese nouns), VI was assessed by two self-reported questions, about distance VA for seeing faces on the other side of the street Compared with older people with no VI, (1) those with DVI only were associated with poor episodic memory (β=–0.076, p<0·0001) Yes. VI is associated with an increased risk of poor cognitive function Moderate
2018 mental intactness (measured using some components of the Telephone Interview of Cognitive Status (TICS) battery), and about near VA for reading newspapers. Individuals were assigned to one of four categories: no VI, mental intactness (β=–0.074, p<0·0001) and global cognition ((β=–0.089, p<0·0001)
and global cognition (the sum of episodic memory and mental intactness scores)—was evaluated and followed up every 2 years distance vision impairment (DVI), near vision impairment (NVI), or both distance and near vision impairment (DNVI) Those with NVI only were associated with poor mental intactness (β=–0.031, p=0·0001) and global cognition (β=–0.032, p=0·0224)
Those with DNVI were associated with poor episodic memory (β=–0.106, p<0·0001), mental intactness (β=–0.107, p<0·0001), global cognition (β=–0.105, p<0·0001)
Ali et al US (Medicare Claims data from 2014) Cross-sectional cohort 472 871 >65 34/66 Cognition ICD-9 diagnosis codes for dementia or cognitive impairment ICD-9 diagnosis codes for blindness/ low vision Among the low vision/blindness group, the prevalence of dementia or CI was 50%. Yes. There was a significant association between low vision/blindness and dementia or AD Moderate
2019 Blindness/low vision was also associated with a greater odds of Alzheimer’s disease (AOR 1.44 95% CI: 1.415 to 1.464)
and all-cause dementia (AOR 1.239, 95% CI: 1.223 to 1.254)
Preeti Gupta et al Singapore (Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Disease (SEED) Study) Longitudinal, cohort 682 67.3 55.6/44.4 Cognition CI was assessed using the validated AMT defined as scores of Fundus images using Canon DGI camera, graded by trained graders at University of Sydney Those with any DR had higher odds of incident CI (OR=2.32, 95% CI 1.07 to 5.03), and those with moderate or worse DR also had a higher likelihood of Yes, DR, particularly at the more severe stages, is associated with Moderate
2019 ≤6 and≤8 for those with 0–6 and>6 years of formal education, respectively using the modified Airlie House classification system and categorised as none (Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) level 10), developing CI (OR=3.41, 95% CI 1.06 to 11.00, p-trend=0.021), compared with those without DR increased risk of developing CI, independent of vision and other risk factors
minimal/mild (level 20–35) and moderate or worse DR, (level 43–90) using data from the better eye
Jost et al China (The Beijing Eye Study) Cross-sectional cohort 3127 64.2 43.4/56.6 Cognition MMSE, assessed as cognitive function score (cfs). Categorised as mild (cfs 23–19), moderate (cfs 18–10) Autorefractometry, Presenting, uncorrected and best corrected VA, Better cognition (ie, higher CFS) was signifcantly associated with better best corrected VA (r2=0.38), Yes Moderate
2018 severe (cfs<9) fundus photo, SD-OCT smaller amount of undercorrected VA, lower prevalence of primary angle-closure glaucoma, and
thicker subfoveal choroidal thickness
Allen et al China Longitudinal, cohort 15 576 74.5 36.2/63.8 Cognition ICD-10 codes or Clinical dementia rating 1 to 3 Acuity: Snellen E chart, converted to LogMAR Participants with incident dementia had poorer VA at baseline than those without (adjusted HR=5.88, 95% CI=4.04–8.57). Yes, Moderate-to-severe visual impairment could be a Moderate
2020 Incident Dementia at years 4–6 of Follow-up in Participants With Mild (HR=1.19, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.65, p=0.31) potential predictor and possibly a risk factor for dementia
Moderate (HR=2.09, 95% CI=1.47–2.97) or Severe VI (HR=8.66, 95% CI=4.60–16.30) at baseline
Cecilia et al US (Adult Changes in Thought (ACT)) Longitudinal, cohort 3877 NA 42/58 Cognition Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument scores 85 underwent a standardised diagnostic evaluation, including physical and neurologic examinations and a neuropsychological test battery ICD-9 codes for diagnosis of gluacoma, AMD, DR and cataract The recent and established HR were 1.46 (P 5.01) and 0.87 (P 5.19) for glaucoma, Yes, Increased AD risk was found for recent glaucoma diagnoses, Moderate
2019 Dementia diagnoses using NINCDS-ARDRA criteria, Our primary outcome was either probable or possible late-onset clinical AD 1.20 (P 5.12) and 1.50 (P,.001) for AMD, and 1.50 (P 5.045) and 1.50 (P 5.03) for DR established AMD diagnoses, and both recent and established DR
Moon Jeong Lee et al US (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1999–2006 cycles)) Cross-sectional cohort 5795 Non-VI 70.3 45/55 Cognition Memory or confusion complaints were defined as present if participants responded “yes” to the question— VA was assessed using the built-in chart in an auto-refractor (NIDEK ARK-760; Nidek Co Ltd, Tokyo, Japan) Individuals with VI were more likely (OR=1.3, p=0.049) to report cognitive complaints as compared with those without VI Yes Moderate
2019 VI 77.8 39/61 “(Are you/is survey participant) limited in any way because of difficulty VI was defined as autorefractor corrected VA worse than 20/40 in the better-seeing eye
remembering or because (you/s/he) experience(s) periods of confusion?”
Ruby Yu et al China Longitudinal, cohort 1949 76.1 23.1/76.9 Cognition 5-item Abbreviated Memory Inventory for Chinese (AMIC). Scored range from 0 to 5 (1 point for each item; 0—best to 5—worse). An AMIC score≥3 is predictive of MCI Questionnaire: “Do you have any difficulty seeing things?”“very good” and “good” = “robust”; “fair”, “not too well”, “poor”, and “very poor” = “poor” Poor vision (OR 2.2 95% CI 1.8 to 2.7) at baseline was significantly associated with an increased risk of at least 3 SMCs at follow-up Yes Moderate
2019
Michio Maruta et al Japan Longitudinal cohort 2190 78.9 20.6/79.4 Cognition Dementia Scale labelled Level 0 to Level IV and level M based on symptoms and the VA assessed at five levels: normal vision (there is no hindrance in daily life),’ ‘able to see vision testing chart at a distance of about 1 m,’ DSI associated with a higher cumulative dementia incidence compared with no sensory impairment (log-rank χ2=39.92; p<0.001) Yes. Moderate
2020 necessity for care. Level II and greater during the 8 year follow-up period was considered ‘able to see vision testing chart at a distance of in front,’ ‘very poor eyesight,’ DSI is the greatest risk factor for developing dementia among sensory impairments (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.22 to 1.71; p<0.001) Older adults with sensory impairments have a high incidence of dementia, with DSI presenting the greatest risk
“incident dementia” and ‘undecidable due to difficulty in communication. Older adults with VI were found to be more likely to have day-night reversal symptoms when dementia occurs
Ann et al UK (English Longitudinal Study of Ageing) Longitudinal cohort 4621 64.9 45/55 Cognition Working memory, Executive function. Results from the three cognitive tests available were summed, VA: Self-report asking participants whether their eyesight was excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor using glasses or corrective lens if they normally do so Compared with people with good vision, poor vision was asso with worse cognitive function Yes, ageing adults with individual and combined impairments in hearing and vision had greater risks of worse cognitive performance at 6 year follow-up compared with those with good sensory function Moderate
2020 providing a cognitive score (range 0–80), with a lower score indicating worse cognitive function B=1.61, 95% CI =(0.92, 2.29)adjusted for age, sex, baseline cognition
Compared with no sensory impairment, DSI was associated with worse cognition (B=2.30, 95% CI =(1.21, 3.39)
Stephanie Chen et al US (NHATS) Longitudinal cohort 7075 NA 40/60 Cognition 1. Doctor told the sample person that he/she had dementia or AD, 2. A score that indicates probable dementia on the AD8 Dementia Screening Interview Self-reported distance and near VI Participants with self-reported visual impairment were at significantly higher risk of developing Yes, self-reported visual impairment in the US Medicare Moderate
2019 3. Cognitive tests that evaluate the sample person’s memory and orientation probable or possible dementia over subsequent follow-up (HR=4.4, CI: 3.9 to 5.0, p<0.001), compared with those without visual impairment population may be associated with greater risk of cognitive decline
This association persisted after full adjustments for covariates (HR=2.1, CI: 1.8 to 2.5, p<0.001)
Ali et al US (Medicare beneficiaries) Cross-sectional cohort 773 905 NA NA Cognition ICD-9 codes and procedure code-based algorithms ICD-9 codes and procedure code-based algorithms Low vision was associated with greater odds of incident hip fracture (AOR 1.13, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.22 No. Moderate
2019 and incident anxiety (AOR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.18 but not incident depression or dementia.
Tien et al Singapore (SEED) Cross-sectional cohort 10 020 58.9 49.3/50.7 Vision AMT, which consists of 10 questions of general cognitive function VA ETDRS chart at 4 m converted to LogMAR For best-corrected bilateral visual loss, cognitive impairment (OR=2.07; 95% CI=1.60–2.68) Yes Moderate
2019 was a significantly associated risk factor. CI was also significantly associated with higher risk of presenting bilateral VI or blindness (OR=2.15; 95% CI=1.75–2.63)
Bonnielin Swenor et al122 US (Health ABC study) Longitudinal cohort 2444 74 47.8/52.2 Cognition DSST and 3 MS. Incident cognitive impairment was defined as VA: Bailey-love chart, CS: Pelli-Robson chart VA impairment HR=1.55, 95% CI 1.12, 2.14 vs No VA impairment, CS impairment HR=1.33 Yes, VA, CS, and stereo acuity are Moderate
2019 a 3 MS score<80 or a decline in 3MS>5 points following Year 3 95% CI 1.13, 1.55 vs No CS impairment risk factors for cognitive decline

ACE-R, Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised; AMD, age-related macular degeneration; CS, contrast sensitivity; DSI, dual sensory impairment; MMSE, Mini-Mental State Examination; MoCA, Montreal-Cognitive Assessment; MPOD, macular pigment optical density; NHATS, National Health and Aging Trends Study; VA, visual acuity; VF, visual field.

Table 5.

Studies with a ‘weak’ rating

Author and title Country (Study name if applicable) Study design No of participants Mean age (M/F) Gender (M/F) Outcome variable CI: type of measurement/
evaluation
VI: Type of measurement/
evaluation
Point estimates and analysis performed Summary of association Quality of study
Bayer20 Germany Case control 228 With AD+Glau 72.9 10%/19% Glaucoma Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease according to the NINADS-ADRDA classification Acuity - Snellen 25.9% occurrence rate of probable glaucoma among AD Yes- Significantly higher occurrence rate of glaucoma Weak
2002 AD 112 With AD+no Glau 71.4 28%/55% VF - Humphrey Field Analyser 5.2% occurrence rate of probable glaucoma among healthy controls among AD patients
Control 116 W/o AD+No glau 68.1 38%/72% Optic disc evaluation
W/o AD+Glau 70.1 2%/4%
Cigolle24 US (1995–2010 of HRS) Longitudinal cohort, Adults>65y 8847 No info No info Cognition Performance based measure (Telephone interview) to determine cognitive function (0–27) No info Vison and hearing predicted cognitive decline (p<0.001) Cognitive function declines in an acclerating fashion, with older age Weak
2013 Abstract Only and visual impairment predicting decline over time
Feeney34 Ireland (The Irish Longitudinal study on Ageing) Cross-sectional study 4281 No info No info Cognition MMSE, MoCA, CTT, CRT, SART, Prospective memory, picture memory, word recall and visual reasoning heterochromatic flicker photometry (HFP) - a non-invasive method of Linear, Negative binomial and logistic regression. MPOD men=0.20, SD=0.15. MPOD is significantly associated with cognitive function Weak
2013 Abstract only gauging the density of Macular Pigment One SD inc in MPOD assoc with few errors on MoCA: b=−0.03 p<0.01 & MMSE: b=−0.05 p=<0.05 among older adults.
Faster time to complete CTT2: b=−0.02 p<0.01, faster CRT: b=−0.06 p<0.01, better word recall:b=0.07 p<0.05
Fewer SRT omission errors: b=−0.04 p<0.05, success on prospective memory task: b=0.14 p<0.01
Jefferis45 UK Cross-sectional study 112 80.7 NA Cognition Revised Addenbrook’s Cognitive Examination (ACE-R) Acuity: LogMar chart, Cataract density graded using LOC III system ACE-R scores were split into those items requiring vision and those items not requiring vision, both subscores Better general cognition (ACE-R total score) was associated with Weak
2013 Abstract Only were significantly and similarly associated with VA (p=0.008 and p=0.001 respectively). better vision (p=0.001)
Maharani et al49 Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe 2002–2014 Cross-sectional study 24 116 NA NA Cognition Using a summary cognitive score from the questions on episodic memory, verbal fluency, and numeracy. Self-reported hearing and visual quality. Sensory function recoded into 2: Older adults with single SI: b=−0.064 (-0.072 to -0.056), with DSI: b=-0.229 (-0.247 to −0.211) Older adults with single and dual SI showed significantly lower Weak
2017 Conference abstract Excellent, v good & good into Good sens fn and fair & poor into Poor sens cognitive function compared with those without SI
Miyata50 Japan (Fujiwara-Kyo study) Cross-sectional study 668 76.3 NA Cognition MMSE Cataract surgery history- obtained using a self-reported questionnaire CI for Cataract surgery group OR: 0.82 (0.68, 0.99) p=0.042 when compared with no cataract sx group Cat Sx group significantly lower odds for CI than the no Cat Sx group Weak
2016 Conference abstract
Nael51 France (Three-City Study) Longitudinal cohort study 7722 Range: 65 & older NA Cogniton Incident dementia over the 12 year follow-up was actively screened for (diagnosis code) Dist VF:loss self-reported, as inability/difficulty recognising a face@ 4 m. Cox regression models: Near VI: HR=1.30 (1.05, 1.61), Dist VF loss: HR=1.47 (1.02, 2.11) compared with those Both near VI and distant VF loss were associated with an increased Weak
2017 Short oral presentation Near VI:presenting binoc VA <20/30 @ reading distance of 33 cm. without visual loss risk of dementia
Setti53 Ireland (The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA)) Cross-sectional study 5021 NA NA Cognition MMSE and MoCA Vision measured subjectively and objectively (no other info) Poor hearing and immediate recall of orally presented words: b=−0.46, poor hearing and delayed recall b=−0.60 Vision was a significant predictor of visually presented tasks Weak
2013 Abstract only Poor hearing and category fluency b=−1.96, poor hearing & memory (OR 0.23)& absent-mindedness (OR2.18). but also of category fluency.
Zheng 56 US (The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Study) Longitudinal cohort 2520 Range 65–84 Vision MMSE Acuity: ETDRS chart VA and MMSE score worsened over time (VA (Log MAR) intercept=0.004, slope=0.022 for VA; MMSE intercept=27.3, slope=-.59; all p<0.001) Both presenting VA and MMSE score worsened over time Weak
2017 Conference abstract The intercept of VA trajectory is statistically significantly associated with the intercept of MMSE trajectory (r=-.267, SE=0.029, p<0.001)
suggesting that worse baseline VA is associated with worse baseline MMSE score.
Ihle et al60 Switzerland (LIVES study) Cross-sectional cohort 2812 77.9 52.7/47.3 Cognition Processing speed- Was assessed by the Trail Making Test part A, Cognitive flexibility- Was assessed by the Trail Making Test part B Self-report on a 3-point Likert-type scale whether their Stability in (inter)relations of the other cognitive and the sensory abilities across the age tranches in old age were not moderated by general cognitive ability, educational level, nor general health status (all ps>0.225) No. Present data do not support the view of a generally increased relation of cognitive and sensory abilities in old age. Weak
2015 range 65–101 Verbal abilities- Was assessed by administering the Mill Hill vocabulary scale current eyesight allowed them to read a newspaper by choosing one of the following
0 D 'no'; 1 D 'yes, but with difficulties'; or 2 D 'yes, without difficulties.'
Soto-Perez-de-Celis et al62 US Cross-sectional case control 750 72 56/44 Cognition Score of 11 in the Blessed Orientation-Memory-Concentration test. Self-reported visual impairment based on their rating of their eyesight OR for VI and: IADL Dependence: 1.9 (1.2–3.2)<0.01, Poor Physical Function: 1.9 (1.1–3.3).03, Possible CI: 1.9 VI was associated with IADL dependence, poor physical function and Weak
2018 Range 65–94 (with glasses) as “excellent,” “good,” “fair,” “poor”, “totally blind” (0.7–4.8) 0.20, Depression: 2.5 (1.4–4.3)<0.01, Anxiety: 1.4 (0.8–2.4).19. OR for DSI and: IADL dep 2.8 (1.5–5.3)<0.01 depression. Dual SI was assicated with IADL dependence, anxiety, depression and CI
Poor Physical Function: 1.7 (0.9–3.4).10, Possible CI: 3.2 (1.3 to 8.1).01, Depression: 2.5 (1.3–4.8)<0.01, Anxiety: 2.3 (1.2–4.2).01
Maharani et al77 HRS, ELSA, SHARE Cross-sectional cohort 13 123 hours 67.8/32.2 41.8/58.2 Cognition Episodic memory: In all surveys, the interviewer reads a list of 10 common nouns to the respondent In HRS and ELSA, self-reported vision quality was collected in all seven waves using the question: 'Is your eyesight (using glasses or corrective lens as usual) excellent (1), very good (2), good (3), fair (4) or poor (5)?'. HRS: Single impairment β −0.15 (0.02)* Yes. Those with sensory impairment are at a greater risk of developing cognitive impairment Weak
2018 11 417 ELSA 64.8/35.2 45.6/54.4 then asks the respondent to recall as many words as possible from the list in any order twice: immediately after the respondent heard the complete list (immediate recall) and at the end of the cognitive function module In SHARE, we used the two self-reported measures of visual function Dual impairment β −0.25 (0.04)* and may show a faster trajectory of cognitive decline that those without sensory impairment
21 265 SHARE 64.8/35.2 45.5/54.5 (delayed recall). that are present in all waves: distance eyesight and reading eyesight. ELSA: Single impairment β−0.14 (0.02)*
Dual impairment β −0.35 (0.05)*
SHARE: Single impairment β −0.26 (0.01)*
Dual impairment β −0.68 (0.03)*
Jefferis et al83 UK (Newcastle 85+study) Cross-sectional cohort 839 no info no info Cognition sMMSE Data collection of general practice records on whether the participant was Median (inter-quartile range) sMMSE scores were 25 (22-29) for SI and 28 (25-29) for non-SI participants (p=0.006). It is important to consider the possibility of vision impairment in older Weak
2012 registered as blind (severly sight impaired) or partially sighted (sight impaired), or neither (by a consultant ophthalmologist) SI participants had lower subscale scores on tasks requiring vision (p<0.001 for each) but also for some subscale people when carrying out the MMSE and to consider using the MMblind.
scores not obviously requiring vision: orientation (p=0.018) and repetition (p=0.030). Beyond this however, visual impairment may be a marker for cognitive impairment.
MacDonald SWS et al84 Canada Longitudinal, cohort 408 NIC 75.44 NIC 35.5/64.5 Cognition Episodic memory-The word recall task (Hultsch, Hertzog, & Dixon, 1990) was used to assess episodic memory Acuity: Vision-Binocular-corrected distance VA was measured at three metres using the Snellen chart. Age-related change in sensory function. Decline in VA was also a notable predictor Weak
2018 SA-MCI :76.71 SA-MCI: 40.5/59.5 Inductive reasoning-The Letter Series test (Thurstone, 1962) was used to assess inductive reasoning. Snellen acuity fractions ranged from 0.20 to 1. Variables, Intercept γ00, Slope γ10, SE Slope, p of being classified as SA-MCI or MA-MCI
MA-MCI: 75.68 MA-MCI: 48.2/51.8 Perceptual speed-The WAIS-R Digit Symbol Substitution task (Wechsler, 1958) was used to assess perceptual processing speed Olfaction: 7.05,–0.043, 0.008,<0.001
Verbal fluency-The Controlled Associations test from the ETS kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests (Ekstrom, French, Harman, & Dermen, 1976) was used to assess verbal fluency. Distance Vision: 0.946,–0.004, 0.001,<0.001
Vocabulary-A recognition vocabulary test, combining three 18-item multiple-choice tests from the ETS kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests (Ekstrom et al., 1976), was used to assess vocabulary Audition: 32.84, 0.796, 0.059,<0.001, γ00=Average sensory function centred at the grand mean of age (74.17 years; SD=9.20); γ10=slope reflecting the average rate of linear change per additional year of age
Miyata et al87 Japan (HEIJO-KYO Cohort) Cross-sectional cohort 945 71.7 46.8/53.2 Cognition MMSE Acuity: using the Landolt ring chart. A better value of LogMAR was used for analysis. Logistic Regression Analysis for the Association Between Ocular Status and Cognitive Impairment Yes. ORs for cognitive impairment were significantly lower in the pseudophakic group than in the phakic group Weak
2015 Questionnaire asking participants about pseudophakia/phakia Age-adjusted, Multivariate OR for cognitive impairment: Model 1, Model 2, Model 3
Confirmed by ophthalmologist using slit-lamp Phakia (no previous cataract surgery): 1.00 (ref), 1.00 (ref), 1.00 (ref), 1.00 (ref),
Pseudophakia (previous cataract surgery): 0.66 (0.45, 0.98), 0.66 (0.44, 0.98), 0.64 (0.43, 0.95), 0.64 (0.43, 0.96)
p: 0.038, 0.039, 0.026, 0.031
Mine et al91 Japan (Fujiwara-kyo Study) Cross-sectional cohort 2818 76.3 52.7/47.3 Cognition MMSE; analysed the MMSE excluding the following vision-related five items: ''naming two objects,'' ''following a 3-step command,''
''reading and following instruction,'' ''writing a sentence,'' and ''visual reconstruction'' and the maximum score for this was 22 points.
Acuity: Landolt ring chart at 5 m (converted to logMAR)(mild visual impairments (>0.2 logMAR)) Associations between VA and Cognitive Impairment (multivariate regression model): Yes. Subjects with mild visual impairments had 2.4 times higher odds of Weak
2016 OR (CI) for different BCVA in the better eye (logMAR) groups: having cognitive impairment than those without visual impairment
≤0: 1.0 (reference), 0–0.1: 1.8 (1.2–2.7) p 0.007
0.1–0.2: 1.7 (0.8–3.5) p 0.187
>0.2: 3.3 (2.1–5.4) p 0.005
Steffi G. Riedel-Heller92 Germany (LEILA 75+and AgeCoDe) Longitudinal, cohort 3199 79.3 34.7/65.3 Cognition No data Self-report at baseline Vision impairment (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.42, p=0.043) and the combination of both (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.83, p=0.001) Yes. Vision impairment is independently associated with incident dementia. Looking at the combination we could show that individuals suffering from both are at highest risk for developing dementia Weak
2019 on dementia incidence adjusted for baseline gender, age, education, marital status, depression, diabetes and cardiovascular risks (smoking, hypertension)
Asri Maharani109 US (HRS) Longitudinal cohort 19 618 57.8 44.6/55.4 Cognition Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS): include episodic memory, serial of 7 subtraction, and counting backward tests Self report: “Is your eyesight (using glasses or corrective lens as usual) excellent (1), very good (2), good (3), fair (4) or poor (5)?” VI and risk of possible CIND HR 1.351 (1.267, 1.441) p<0.001 when compared with no VI. VI and risk of probable Yes. Self-assessed sensory impairment is independently associated with cognitive decline and incident possible CIND and probable dementia Weak
2019 Waves 3 (1996) to 12 (2014) categorised those scoring 0 to 6 points on the 27-point TICS scale as having probable dementia Further categorised sensory impairment in the simultaneous model into no impairment, dementia HR 1.255 (1.074, 1.466) p=0.004 when compared with no VI
seven to 11 as having possible CIND, and 12 to 27 as having normal cognitive function single (vision or hearing) sensory impairment, and DSI (impairment in both senses).
Phillip Hwang et al112 US (GEM study) Longitudinal cohort 2827 NA NA Cognition Incident dementia over 7 years of follow-up was based on a clinical diagnosis of dementia using DSM-IV criteria Self-report For all-cause dementia, the adjusted HR was 1.27 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.59) for single sensory visual or hearing impairment, Yes, Dual visual and hearing impairment was strongly associated with increased risk of all-cause dementia and AD Weak
2019 Alzheimer’s disease was determined using NINCDS-ADRDA criteria and 1.70 (95% CI: 1.18, 2.45) for dual visual and hearing impairment, compared with no sensory impairment
Virginie Naël113 France (The Three-City-Alienor Cohort) Longitudinal cohort 7460 NA NA Cognition four cognitive domains (global cognition (MMSE and MMSE-blind), verbal fluency (IST), At baseline, near VI was measured using the Parinaud scale Participants with near VI and distance VF loss had lower baseline performances in verbal fluency, Yes but only baseline. Participants with Weak
2019 executive function (TMT) and visuospatial abilities (BVRT)) were assessed up to 6 times over 12 years of follow-up at a standardised reading distance of 33 cm and distance VF loss was global cognition, executive function and visuospatial abilities. Regarding changes over time, visual loss had lower baseline performances in several cognitive tests
self-reported, defined as inability or difficulty in recognising a familiar face at 4 m MMSE where participants with mild near VI exhibited a faster cognitive decline (b=−0.02, p=0.04)
M.Q.Li116 China Cross-sectional cohort 10 116 NA NA Vision AD8 questionnaire No info Risk factor for cognitive impairment: VA loss 1.383 (1.188, 1.610) Yes, The old people who suffered from a variety of chronic diseases including, poor eyesight were prone to cognitive impairment Weak
2019
Melanie Varin118 US Cross-sectional cohort 365 AMD:83.1 32.4/67.6 Cognition six cognitive tests orally: the 1 min verbal fluency test (letter and category versions) Binocular VA was measured using the ETDRS chart at 2 m People with glaucoma showed lower scores on three cognitive tests than the group with normal vision: Yes Weak
2019 Glaucoma:78.1 43.7/56.3 the digit span test (forward and backward versions), and the logical memory test (immediate and 30 min delayed recall) VF measured using HFA, CS measured using the Pelli Robson chart at 1 m the digit span forward and backward tests (b=−0.8, 95% CI −1.5 to –0.2 and b=−0.7, 95% CI −1.3 to –0.1, respectively) People with glaucoma showed lower scores on cognitive tests
Peiyuan Qiu120 China (Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey) Longitudinal cohort 3859 74.5 48.7/51.3 Cognition Chinese MMSE (C-MMSE) Self-report NA Yes, visual impairment was a risk factor for cognitive decline Weak
2019

AMD, age-related macular degeneration; CS, contrast sensitivity; DSI, dual sensory impairment; ELSA, English Longitudinal Study of Aging; HRS, Health and Retirement Study; MMSE, Mini-Mental State Examination; MoCA, Montreal-Cognitive Assessment; MPOD, macular pigment optical density; sMMSE, standardised MMSE; VA, visual acuity; VF, visual field.

Study findings

Of the 110 studies included (tables 3–5), 91 found a significant positive association between VI and cognitive decline, cognitive impairment or dementia, and 13 studies found no significant association.26 30 43 44 60 61 68 81 82 90 94 115 117 There were six studies that were inconclusive.23 37 67 70 79 83 Of the 91 studies that found a significant association, 77 used objective methods to assess their vision or cognitive outcome. Of the 43 longitudinal studies, 35 found a significant association between VI and cognitive decline, cognitive impairment or dementia. The most commonly presented statistical measures were ORs and HRs. The random 10% of the study sample that was separately extracted by an independent author (LA) was found to be similar to elements from the primary extraction.

Discussion

In this systematic review, we evaluated and synthesised the literature examining the association between VI and cognitive function among older adults, and found strong agreement that VI is associated with cognitive impairment, cognitive decline or dementia. Results from the longitudinal studies that found a positive association between vision and cognition supports our hypothesis that VI may be a risk factor for cognitive impairment, cognitive decline or dementia.

Ninety-one studies reported associations between decline in visual and cognitive functions. Garin et al,40 who received a ‘moderate’ rating in the QA, performed a cross-sectional analysis in a representative sample of Spanish population and measured cognition objectively. They also measured distance and near vision and found that objective and subjectively measured poor distance and near VA were associated with worse cognitive functioning. Lin et al47 used data from a large longitudinal cohort study of older women and found that VI was associated with greater odds of cognitive and functional decline over 2 years. This study used objective measures of assessment for both vision and cognition and received a ‘strong’ rating in the bias assessment. Luo et al,48 who received a ‘moderate’ rating in QA, performed a cross-sectional analysis on a large population sample from China. They reported that those with VI and Dual Sensory Impairment (DSI) were more likely to have severe to extremely severe dementia compared with those without any sensory impairment. Another longitudinal study that received a ‘moderate’ rating in QA from Germany by Hajek et al58 with a large sample size (n=2394) showed that the onset of severe VI was associated with a decline in cognitive function scores. Uhlmann et al64 in their paired case–control study between VI and dementia patients concluded that VI was associated with both an increased risk and an increased clinical severity of AD. Although Frost et al38 found a strong association between early age-related macular degeneration and AD, their study was cross-sectional, and the sample size was too low to derive an inference. Both these studies received ‘moderate’ rating in QA. Davies-Kershaw et al95 in their longitudinal analysis using the ELSA wave 2 and wave 7 data found that individuals in the younger group (50–69 years) and with moderate and poor self-rated vision were at greater risk of developing dementia than those with normal self-rated vision. Hamedani et al99 used Medicare claims data from 2014 consisting of 472 871 participants and concluded that blindness/low vision was associated with a greater odd of Alzheimer’s disease and all-cause dementia. Both these studies also received ‘moderate’ rating in QA. Soto-Perez-de-Celis et al62 in their cross-sectional study case–control study found that DSI was significantly associated with possible CI. However, the study received an overall ‘weak’ rating in QA.

Of the 91 studies that found an association between VI and cognitive function, 35 were longitudinal, 46 were cross-sectional and 10 were case–control studies. Of the 13 studies that found no association between VI and cognitive function, 6 were longitudinal, 5 were cross-sectional and 2 were case–control studies. Ihle et al60 performed a cross-sectional analysis using a sample of 2812 participants from Switzerland. They objectively measured cognition and vision and concluded that their data did not support an increased relation of cognitive and sensory abilities in old age. This study received a ‘weak’ rating in QA. Hong et al82 used data from Blue Mountain Eye Study, a longitudinal study from Australia that studied associations between VI and a decline in MMSE scores over a duration of 10 years. The study concluded that VI was not associated with cognitive decline over 5 years or 10 years. Although the study included a large number of participants overall (n=2334), only 152 individuals with VI were included in this analysis, suggesting that there may have been survival bias. Brenowitz et al94 in their longitudinal study using the Health ABC data concluded that VA and CS independently were not significantly associated with incident dementia. However, Swenor et al122 used data from the same study and found that impaired VA, CS and stereo acuity had a greater risk of incident cognitive impairment. This could be due to the different outcome measures assessed, that is, dementia94 vs cognitive impairment.122 These three studies received a ‘moderate’ rating in QA. Michalowsky et al,117 who received a ‘strong’ rating in their case–control study concluded that VI was not significantly associated with dementia, a combination of both visual and hearing impairments was significantly associated with the risk of dementia.

There was considerable heterogeneity in the measurement and reporting of cognitive function. Studies measured cognitive function using a variety of instruments with the most common being MMSE. The MMSE is a paper‐based test with a maximum score of 30, with lower scores indicating more severe cognitive impairment. A score of 24 is often used as a threshold to define ‘normal’ cognitive function.123 The MMSE has been found to be a valid and reliable tool as assesses by many studies.123 124 Several studies used self-report, diagnosis codes and data from existing records to define cognitive status. Similarly, visual function was also assessed by various methods including self-report. While VA was assessed most commonly, there was significant variation in the charts and tools used to assess it. The parameters used to define cognitive decline and VI may have impacted results across and within studies.

Our systematic review has found that there is a strong consensus in the literature that VI is associated with cognitive decline, cognitive impairment or dementia. Two hypotheses may help explain this association. The first one is that a common pathological process (eg, vascular disease) might be responsible for both the sensory and cognitive impairment in older adults. The second one is that by increasing cognitive load, sensory impairments such as VI might cause cognitive impairment.125 Literature also suggests that vision rehabilitation in the form of cataract surgery slows the rate of cognitive decline, and therefore, early vision interventions could potentially reduce risk of dementia.126

Our review evaluated bias for all of the 110 included studies. The majority of studies included in our review were cross-sectional, and according to EPHPP guidelines, cross-sectional studies can only receive a low or moderate rating in the bias assessment. Cross-sectional studies are also prone to selection bias, thus yielding estimates that may not reflect true associations in the target population. Studies receiving a strong rating were all longitudinal. However, the tool penalises longitudinal studies that lose >40% of participants due to dropouts/withdrawals. This may, perhaps unfairly, affect longer longitudinal studies to a greater extent since they collect data over many years and can have more drop-outs due to deaths since they are conducted among older adults.

This review has several important implications. First, it highlights the need for standardised methods to assess and define both visual and cognitive function that will aid future research on these emerging public health issues. Second, it brings into focus the consistent association of VI with cognitive impairment in older adults and the need to better understand the mechanisms underlying this relationship. Third, as the longitudinal results support the sensory consequence theory, and suggest that VI may be a risk factor for cognitive decline, this points to a need for formulating preventive measures and vision rehabilitation models, such as prescription glasses, cataract surgery, low vision rehabilitation, etc, that could have the potential to improve overall health and well-being of older adults.

Limitations

Given the large number of studies included in this review and the heterogeneity of measures used to assess the outcome, it was not possible to compare and meta-analyse results across studies. Although 35 longitudinal studies found a positive association between VI and cognitive decline, we cannot establish temporality between this relationship due to the heterogeneous nature of the studies. The studies included diverse populations, with different disease processes, and variation in definitions of both cognitive and VI. There is also potential bias associated with studies that used different protocols for cognitive and sensory measurements. The MMSE, which was the most commonly used assessment method for testing cognition is sensory dependent and therefore one can argue that the results may be confounded with VI.127 Further studies should examine the impact of using vision independent cognitive tests on the vision–cognition relationship. Our review examined all cause VI and dementia, and further study is needed to examine the vision–cognition relationship by dementia subtype and by different vision pathology. However, despite the heterogeneity in studies and assessment methods, we synthesised the evidence qualitatively and by taking into account study quality assessed using a validated tool. While our search strategy was robust, it may have been limited by the exclusion of studies that were not published in English.

Conclusion

The number of older adults with VI and dementia is increasing globally, and therefore, the elucidation of the relationship between vision and cognition is of particular public health importance. This systematic review found that the positive association of VI with cognitive decline, cognitive impairment or dementia is largely consistent across studies using different measures of vision and cognition, as well as between countries and cohorts. This overall agreement in the literature suggests that poor visual and cognitive function are associated, and that additional research is now needed to move beyond documenting these associations. The focus of this area of research should now turn to identifying the factors and strategies that mediate the vision–cognition relationship and identifying potential interventions, such as vision rehabilitation models and strategies tailored to people with VI, that may mitigate the cognitive implications of VI.

Supplementary Material

Reviewer comments
Author's manuscript

Acknowledgments

BKS and NN had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Footnotes

Twitter: @LamaAssi3

Contributors: Study concept and design: BKS and HW. Collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data: BKS, NN, EC, MM and YS. Drafting of manuscript: NN and LA. Preparation, review or approval of the manuscript: NN, VV, LA, BKS, JRE and HW. Decision to submit the manuscript for publication: BKS, JRE and HW.

Funding: BKS is supported by funding from the National Institute on Ageing (K01AG052640). JRE is supported by the National Eye Institute (K23EY027848).

Competing interests: None declared.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Supplemental material: This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication

Not applicable.

References

  • 1.Livingston G, Sommerlad A, Orgeta V, et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care. Lancet 2017;390:2673–734. 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31363-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.M Prince, Guerchet M, Ali GC. World Alzheimer report 2015—the global impact of dementia: an analysis of prevalence, incidence, cost and trends. London: Alzheimer’s Disease International, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.World Health Organization . World report of vision. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bourne RRA, Flaxman SR, Braithwaite T, et al. Magnitude, temporal trends, and projections of the global prevalence of blindness and distance and near vision impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health 2017;5:e888–97. 10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30293-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Alzheimer’s Disease International . The global impact of dementia 2013–2050: policy brief for heads of Government. London: Alzheimer’s Disease International, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Baker ML, Wang JJ, Rogers S, et al. Early age-related macular degeneration, cognitive function, and dementia: the cardiovascular health study. Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:667–73. 10.1001/archophthalmol.2009.30 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Reyes-Ortiz CA, Kuo Y-F, DiNuzzo AR, et al. Near vision impairment predicts cognitive decline: data from the Hispanic established populations for epidemiologic studies of the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005;53:681–6. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53219.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Albers MW, Gilmore GC, Kaye J, et al. At the interface of sensory and motor dysfunctions and Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer's and Dementia 2015;11:70–98. 10.1016/j.jalz.2014.04.514 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Zheng DD, Swenor BK, Christ SL, et al. Longitudinal associations between visual impairment and cognitive functioning: the Salisbury eye evaluation study. JAMA Ophthalmol 2018;136:989–95. 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2018.2493 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Whitson HE, Cronin-Golomb A, Cruickshanks KJ, et al. American geriatrics Society and National Institute on aging Bench-to-Bedside conference: sensory impairment and cognitive decline in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2018;66:2052–8. 10.1111/jgs.15506 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Organization, WH . Risk Reduction of Cognitive Decline And Dementia - WHO Guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2019. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Flaxman SR, Bourne RRA, Resnikoff S, et al. Global causes of blindness and distance vision impairment 1990-2020: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health 2017;5:e1221–34. 10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30393-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) . Quality assessment tool for quantitative studie, 1998. Available: https://merst.ca/ephpp/
  • 14.Ajana S, Weber D, Helmer C, et al. Plasma concentrations of lutein and zeaxanthin, macular pigment optical density, and their associations with cognitive performances among older adults. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2018;59:1828–35. 10.1167/iovs.17-22656 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Anstey KJ, Hofer SM, Luszcz MA. A latent growth curve analysis of late-life sensory and cognitive function over 8 years: evidence for specific and common factors underlying change. Psychol Aging 2003;18:714–26. 10.1037/0882-7974.18.4.714 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Anstey KJ, Luszcz MA, Sanchez L. Two-year decline in vision but not hearing is associated with memory decline in very old adults in a population-based sample. Gerontology 2001;47:289–93. 10.1159/000052814 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Arnaoutoglou NA, Arnaoutoglou M, Nemtsas P, et al. Color perception differentiates alzheimer’s disease (AD) from vascular dementia (VaD) patients. Int Psychogeriatr 2017;29:1355–61. 10.1017/S1041610217000096 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Arrighi HM, McLaughlin T, Leibman C. Prevalence and impact of dementia-related functional limitations in the United States, 2001 to 2005. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2010;24:72–8. 10.1097/WAD.0b013e3181a1a87d [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Bauer K, Schwarzkopf L, Graessel E, et al. A claims data-based comparison of comorbidity in individuals with and without dementia. BMC Geriatr 2014;14:10. 10.1186/1471-2318-14-10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Bayer AU, Ferrari F, Erb C. High occurrence rate of glaucoma among patients with alzheimer’s disease. Eur Neurol 2002;47:165–8. 10.1159/000047976 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Chen S, Chang Y, Tsai M. The predictability of eye diseases for alzheimer’s disease. Neuro-ophthalmology Japan 2016;33:317. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Chen SP, Bhattacharya J, Pershing S. Association of vision loss with cognition in older adults. JAMA Ophthalmol 2017;135:963–70. 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.2838 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Chriqui E, Law C, Kergoat M-J, et al. Visual impairment in older institutionalised Canadian seniors with dementia. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2017;37:225–33. 10.1111/opo.12358 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Cigolle C, Blaum C, Ha J. Geriatric conditions predict accelerating decline in cognitive function in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2013;61:S160. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.De Celis ESP, Sun CL, Tew WP. Impact of hearing and visual impairment in older adults with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2017;35. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.de Kok DS, Teh RO, Pillai A, et al. What is the relationship between visual impairment and cognitive function in octogenarians? N Z Med J 2017;130:33–47. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Dearborn PJ, Elias MF, Sullivan KJ, et al. Poorer visual acuity is associated with declines in cognitive performance across multiple cognitive domains: the maine-syracuse longitudinal study. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2018;24:746–54. 10.1017/S1355617718000358 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Diniz-Filho A, Delano-Wood L, Daga FB, et al. Association between neurocognitive decline and visual field variability in glaucoma. JAMA Ophthalmol 2017;135:734–9. 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.1279 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Elliott AF, McGwin G, Kline LB, et al. Vision impairment among older adults residing in subsidized housing communities. Gerontologist 2015;55 Suppl 1:108. 10.1093/geront/gnv028 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Elliott AF, McGwin G, Owsley C. Vision-enhancing interventions in nursing home residents and their short-term effect on physical and cognitive function. J Am Geriatr Soc 2009;57:202–8. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.02099.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Elyashiv SM, Shabtai EL, Belkin M. Correlation between visual acuity and cognitive functions. Br J Ophthalmol 2014;98:129–32. 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304149 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Feeney J, Finucane C, Savva G. Macular pigment optical density (MPOD) is associated with cognitive function in a population-based sample of older adults. Age Ageing 2013;42:ii25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Elliott AF, McGwin G, Owsley C. Health-related quality of life and visual and cognitive impairment among nursing-home residents. Br J Ophthalmol 2009;93:240–3. 10.1136/bjo.2008.142356 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Feeney J, Finucane C, Savva GM, et al. Low macular pigment optical density is associated with lower cognitive performance in a large, population-based sample of older adults. Neurobiol Aging 2013;34:2449–56. 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.05.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Fischer ME, Cruickshanks KJ, Schubert CR, et al. Age-related sensory impairments and risk of cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 2016;64:1981–7. 10.1111/jgs.14308 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Formiga F, Ferrer A, Pérez-Castejón JM, et al. Relationship between sensory impairment and functional status in nonagenarians. The NonaSantfeliu study. Revista Espanola de Geriatria y Gerontologia 2006;41:258–63. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Friedman DS, Munoz B, Massof RW, et al. Grating visual acuity using the preferential-looking method in elderly nursing home residents. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:2578. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Frost S, Guymer R, Aung KZ, et al. Alzheimer's disease and the early signs of age-related macular degeneration. Curr Alzheimer Res 2016;13:1259–66. 10.2174/1567205013666160603003800 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Fuller SD, Mudie LI, Siordia C, et al. Nationwide prevalence of self-reported serious sensory impairments and their associations with self-reported cognitive and functional difficulties. Ophthalmology 2018;125:476–85. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.11.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Garin N, Olaya B, Lara E, et al. Visual impairment and multimorbidity in a representative sample of the Spanish population. BMC Public Health 2014;14:815. 10.1186/1471-2458-14-815 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Gaynes BI, Shah R, Leurgans S, et al. Neuroticism modifies the association of vision impairment and cognition among community-dwelling older adults. Neuroepidemiology 2013;40:142–6. 10.1159/000342762 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Guthrie DM, Davidson JGS, Williams N, et al. Combined impairments in vision, hearing and cognition are associated with greater levels of functional and communication difficulties than cognitive impairment alone: analysis of interRAI data for home care and long-term care recipients in Ontario. PLoS One 2018;13:e0192971. 10.1371/journal.pone.0192971 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Hall TA, McGwin G, Owsley C. Effect of cataract surgery on cognitive function in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005;53:2140–4. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.00499.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Hofer SM, Berg S, Era P. Evaluating the interdependence of aging-related changes in visual and auditory acuity, balance, and cognitive functioning. Psychol Aging 2003;18:285–305. 10.1037/0882-7974.18.2.285 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Jefferis JM, Clarke MP, Collerton D. Cognition in the cataract clinic. Neuro-Ophthalmology 2013;37:105. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Jefferis JM, Taylor J-P, Collerton J, et al. The association between diagnosed glaucoma and cataract and cognitive performance in very old people: cross-sectional findings from the Newcastle 85+ study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2013;20:82–8. 10.3109/09286586.2012.757626 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Lin MY, Gutierrez PR, Stone KL, et al. Vision impairment and combined vision and hearing impairment predict cognitive and functional decline in older women. J Am Geriatr Soc 2004;52:1996–2002. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52554.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Luo Y, He P, Guo C, et al. Association between sensory impairment and dementia in older adults: evidence from China. J Am Geriatr Soc 2018;66:480–6. 10.1111/jgs.15202 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Maharani A, Pendleton N, Tampubolon G, et al. Sensory impairments and 2 cognitive ageing among older europeans: a longitudinal analysis. Alzheimer's and Dementia 2017;13:P565. 10.1016/j.jalz.2017.07.176 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Miyata K, Mine M, Morikawa M. Association between cataract surgery and cognitive function in Japanese elderly: cross sectional fujiwara-kyo cohort study. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci 2016;57. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Nael V, Delcourt C, Dartigues JF. Visual loss and 12 years risk of dementia in older adults: a French population-based cohort study. Neurodegenerative Diseases 2017;17:242.28787714 [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Rovner BW, et al. Psychological and cognitive determinants of vision function in age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthal 2011;129:890. 10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.146 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Setti A, Loughman J, Shanahan W. The impact of visual and hearing deficits on cognition: task-specific or general? Ir J Med Sci 2013;182:S215. [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Spierer O, Fischer N, Barak A, et al. Correlation between vision and cognitive function in the elderly: a cross-sectional study. Medicine 2016;95:e2423. 10.1097/MD.0000000000002423 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Varin M, Kergoat M-J, Belleville S, et al. Age-related eye disease and participation in cognitive activities. Sci Rep 2017;7:17980. 10.1038/s41598-017-18419-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Zheng DD, Christ SL, Swenor BK. Longitudinal relationship between visual acuity and cognitive functioning in community residing older adults: the salisbury eye evaluation study. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci 2017;58. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Gussekloo J, de Craen AJM, Oduber C, et al. Sensory impairment and cognitive functioning in oldest-old subjects: the Leiden 85+ study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2005;13:781–6. 10.1176/appi.ajgp.13.9.781 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Hajek A, Brettschneider C, Lühmann D, et al. Effect of visual impairment on physical and cognitive function in old age: findings of a population-based prospective cohort study in Germany. J Am Geriatr Soc 2016;64:2311–6. 10.1111/jgs.14458 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Hidalgo JL-T, Martínez IP, Bravo BN, et al. Visual function versus visual acuity in older people. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2009;16:268. 10.3109/09286580902999397 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Ihle A, Oris M, Fagot D, et al. No cross-sectional evidence for an increased relation of cognitive and sensory abilities in old age. Aging Ment Health 2017;21:409–15. 10.1080/13607863.2015.1109055 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Jefferis JM, Taylor J-P, Clarke MP. Does cognitive impairment influence outcomes from cataract surgery? results from a 1-year follow-up cohort study. Br J Ophthalmol 2015;99:412–7. 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305657 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Soto-Perez-de-Celis E, Sun C-L, Tew WP, et al. Association between patient-reported hearing and visual impairments and functional, psychological, and cognitive status among older adults with cancer. Cancer 2018;124:3249–56. 10.1002/cncr.31540 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Pham TQ, Kifley A, Mitchell P, et al. Relation of age-related macular degeneration and cognitive impairment in an older population. Gerontology 2006;52:353–8. 10.1159/000094984 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Uhlmann RF, Larson EB, Koepsell TD, et al. Visual impairment and cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer's disease. J Gen Intern Med 1991;6:126–32. 10.1007/BF02598307 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Guthrie DM, Declercq A, Finne-Soveri H, et al. The health and well-being of older adults with dual sensory impairment (DSI) in four countries. PLoS One 2016;11:e0155073. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Harrabi H, Kergoat M-J, Rousseau J, et al. Age-related eye disease and cognitive function. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2015;56:1217–21. 10.1167/iovs.14-15370 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Haan M, Espeland MA, Klein BE, et al. Cognitive function and retinal and ischemic brain changes: the women's health Initiative. Neurology 2012;78:942–9. 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31824d9655 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Holmén K, Andersson L, Ericsson K, et al. Visual impairment related to cognition and loneliness in old age. Scand J Caring Sci 1994;8:99–105. 10.1111/j.1471-6712.1994.tb00236.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Su C-W, Lin C-C, Kao C-H, et al. Association between glaucoma and the risk of dementia. Medicine 2016;95:e2833. 10.1097/MD.0000000000002833 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Trick GL, Trick LR, Morris P, et al. Visual field loss in senile dementia of the alzheimer’s type. Neurology 1995;45:68–74. 10.1212/WNL.45.1.68 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Miyata K, Yoshikawa T, Morikawa M, et al. Effect of cataract surgery on cognitive function in elderly: results of Fujiwara-kyo eye study. PLoS One 2018;13:e0192677. 10.1371/journal.pone.0192677 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Ong S-Y, Ikram MK, Haaland BA, et al. Myopia and cognitive dysfunction: the Singapore Malay eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2013;54:799–803. 10.1167/iovs.12-10460 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Soler V, Sourdet S, Balardy L, et al. Visual impairment screening at the geriatric frailty clinic for assessment of frailty and prevention of disability at the Gérontopôle. J Nutr Health Aging 2016;20:870–7. 10.1007/s12603-015-0648-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Sun H-P, Liu H, Xu Y, et al. Myopia and cognitive dysfunction among elderly Chinese adults: a propensity score matching analysis. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2016;36:191–6. 10.1111/opo.12248 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Zheng DD, Swenor BK, Christ SL, et al. Longitudinal associations between visual impairment and cognitive functioning: the salisbury eye evaluation study. JAMA Ophthalmol 2018;136:989–95. 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2018.2493 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Ward ME, Gelfand JM, Lui L-Y, et al. Reduced contrast sensitivity among older women is associated with increased risk of cognitive impairment. Ann Neurol 2018;83:730–8. 10.1002/ana.25196 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Maharani A, Dawes P, Nazroo J, et al. Visual and hearing impairments are associated with cognitive decline in older people. Age Ageing 2018;47:575–81. 10.1093/ageing/afy061 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Mitoku K, Masaki N, Ogata Y, et al. Vision and hearing impairments, cognitive impairment and mortality among long-term care recipients: a population-based cohort study. BMC Geriatr 2016;16:112. 10.1186/s12877-016-0286-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Jefferis JM, Clarke MP, Taylor J-P. Effect of cataract surgery on cognition, mood, and visual hallucinations in older adults. J Cataract Refract Surg 2015;41:1241–7. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.09.044 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Helmer C, Malet F, Rougier M-B, et al. Is there a link between open-angle glaucoma and dementia? the three-city-alienor cohort. Ann Neurol 2013;74:171–9. 10.1002/ana.23926 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Lindenberger U, Ghisletta P. Cognitive and sensory declines in old age: gauging the evidence for a common cause. Psychol Aging 2009;24:1–16. 10.1037/a0014986 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Hong T, Mitchell P, Burlutsky G, et al. Visual impairment, hearing loss and cognitive function in an older population: longitudinal findings from the blue Mountains eye study. PLoS One 2016;11:e0147646. 10.1371/journal.pone.0147646 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Jefferis JM, Collerton J, Taylor J-P, et al. The impact of visual impairment on mini-mental state examination scores in the Newcastle 85+ study. Age Ageing 2012;41:565–8. 10.1093/ageing/afs042 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.MacDonald SWS, Keller CJC, Brewster PWH, et al. Contrasting olfaction, vision, and audition as predictors of cognitive change and impairment in non-demented older adults. Neuropsychology 2018;32:450–60. 10.1037/neu0000439 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Mandas A, Mereu RM, Catte O, et al. Cognitive impairment and age-related vision disorders: their possible relationship and the evaluation of the use of aspirin and statins in a 65 years-and-over Sardinian population.. Front Aging Neurosci 2014;6:309. 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00309 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Mendola JD, Cronin-Golomb A, Corkin S, et al. Prevalence of visual deficits in alzheimer’s disease. Optometry and Vision Science 1995;72:155–67. 10.1097/00006324-199503000-00003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Miyata K, Obayashi K, Saeki K, et al. Higher cognitive function in elderly individuals with previous cataract surgery: cross-sectional association independent of visual acuity in the HEIJO-KYO cohort. Rejuvenation Res 2016;19:239–43. 10.1089/rej.2015.1718 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Magalhães MOdeC, Peixoto JMdeS, Frank MH, et al. Risk factors for dementia in a rural area of northeastern Brazil. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2008;66:157–62. 10.1590/s0004-282x2008000200003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Ong SY, Cheung CY, Li X, et al. Visual impairment, age-related eye diseases, and cognitive function: the Singapore Malay eye study. Arch Ophthalmol 2012;130:895–900. 10.1001/archophthalmol.2012.152 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Mangione CM, Seddon JM, Cook EF, et al. Correlates of cognitive function scores in elderly outpatients. J Am Geriatr Soc 1993;41:491–7. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1993.tb01883.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Mine M, Miyata K, Morikawa M, et al. Association of visual acuity and cognitive impairment in older individuals: Fujiwara-kyo eye study. Biores Open Access 2016;5:228–34. 10.1089/biores.2016.0023 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Riedel-Heller SG, Roehr S, König H-H, et al. Self-Reported hearing and vision impairment predicts dementia in the oldest old: pooled analysis from German old-age cohorts (agedifferent.de platform). Alzheimer's and Dementia 2019;15:P194. 10.1016/j.jalz.2019.06.4523 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Wittich W, Al-Yawer F, Phillips N. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity at various stages of cognitive impairment in the Compass-ND study. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci 2019;60. [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Brenowitz WD, Kaup AR, Lin FR, et al. Multiple sensory impairment is associated with increased risk of dementia among black and white older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2019;74:890896. 10.1093/gerona/gly264 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Davies-Kershaw HR, Hackett RA, Cadar D, et al. Vision impairment and risk of dementia: findings from the English longitudinal study of ageing. J Am Geriatr Soc 2018;66:1823–9. 10.1111/jgs.15456 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Cao G-Y, Yao S-S, Zhang Q, et al. Visual impairment is associated with cognitive impairment among adults aged 50 years and older in China: data from the China health and retirement longitudinal study. The Lancet 2018;392:S83. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32712-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.de la Fuente J, Hjelmborg J, Wod M, et al. Longitudinal associations of sensory and cognitive functioning: a structural equation modeling approach. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2019;74:1308–16. 10.1093/geronb/gby147 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Hamalainen A, Phillips N, Wittich W, et al. Sensory-cognitive associations are only weakly mediated or moderated by social factors in the Canadian longitudinal study on aging. Sci Rep 2019;9:19660. 10.1038/s41598-019-55696-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Hamedani AG, VanderBeek BL, Willis AW. Blindness and visual impairment in the Medicare population: disparities and association with hip fracture and neuropsychiatric outcomes. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2019;26:279–85. 10.1080/09286586.2019.1611879 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Gupta P, Gan ATL, Man REK, et al. Association between diabetic retinopathy and incident cognitive impairment. Br J Ophthalmol 2019;103:1605–9. 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-312807 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Huang C, Sun S, Wang W, et al. Cognition mediates the relationship between sensory function and gait speed in older adults: evidence from the English longitudinal study of ageing. J Alzheimers Dis 2019;70:1153–61. 10.3233/JAD-190364 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Jonas JB, Wei WB, Zhu LP, et al. Cognitive function and Ophthalmological diseases: the Beijing eye study. Sci Rep 2018;8:4816. 10.1038/s41598-018-23314-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Lee ATC, Richards M, Chan WC, et al. Higher dementia incidence in older adults with poor visual acuity. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2020;75:2162–8. 10.1093/gerona/glaa036 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Lee CS, Larson EB, Gibbons LE, et al. Associations between recent and established ophthalmic conditions and risk of Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement 2019;15:34–41. 10.1016/j.jalz.2018.06.2856 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Lee MJ, Varadaraj V, Ramulu PY, et al. Memory and confusion complaints in visually impaired older adults: an understudied aspect of well-being. Gerontol Geriatr Med 2019;5:233372141881894. 10.1177/2333721418818944 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Yu R, Woo J. Cognitive assessment of older people: do sensory function and frailty matter? Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019;16. 10.3390/ijerph16040662. [Epub ahead of print: 24 Feb 2019]. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Nael V, Moreau G, Pérès K. P3‐596: visual loss and cognitive decline in older adults: results from a French population‐based cohort study. Alzheimer's and Dementia 2018;14:P1355–6. 10.1016/j.jalz.2018.06.1962 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Maruta M, Tabira T, Sagari A, et al. Impact of sensory impairments on dementia incidence and symptoms among Japanese older adults. Psychogeriatrics 2020;20:262–70. 10.1111/psyg.12494 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Maharani A, Dawes P, Nazroo J. Associations between self-reported sensory impairment and risk of cognitive decline and impairment in the health and retirement study (HRS) cohort. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 10.1093/geronb/gbz043 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Lim ZW, Chee M-L, Soh ZD, Da Soh Z, et al. Association between visual impairment and decline in cognitive function in a multiethnic Asian population. JAMA Netw Open 2020;3:e203560. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3560 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Liljas AEM, Walters K, de Oliveira C, et al. Self-reported sensory impairments and changes in cognitive performance: a longitudinal 6-year follow-up study of English community-dwelling adults aged ⩾50 years. J Aging Health 2020;32:243–51. 10.1177/0898264318815391 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112.Hwang PH, Longstreth WT, Francis CE, et al. Dual sensory impairment in older adults and risk of dementia and alzheimer’S disease. Alzheimer's and Dementia 2019;15:P196. 10.1016/j.jalz.2019.06.4527 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113.Naël V, Pérès K, Dartigues J-F, et al. Vision loss and 12-year risk of dementia in older adults: the 3C cohort study. Eur J Epidemiol 2019;34:141–52. 10.1007/s10654-018-00478-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114.Chen S, Pershing S. Longitudinal impact of visual impairment on cognitive function in the US. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci 2018;59 http://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&from=export&id=L628536693 [Google Scholar]
  • 115.Hamedani A, Willis A. Vision loss in parkinson’s disease: Prevalence and association with outcomes among medicare beneficiaries. Neurology 2019;92 http://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&from=export&id=L629496163 [Google Scholar]
  • 116.MQ L, Huang HH, Mou X. Cognitive impairment and influencing factors in 70 years old people in jianghan oil field. J Am Geriatr Soc 2018;66:S476–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 117.Michalowsky B, Hoffmann W, Kostev K. Association between hearing and vision impairment and risk of dementia: results of a case-control study based on secondary data. Front Aging Neurosci 2019;11:363. 10.3389/fnagi.2019.00363 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118.Varin M, Kergoat M-J, Belleville S, et al. Age-related eye disease and cognitive function: the search for mediators. Ophthalmology 2020;127:660–6. 10.1016/j.ophtha.2019.10.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119.Wong TY, Tham Y-C, Sabanayagam C, et al. Patterns and risk factor profiles of visual loss in a multiethnic Asian population: the Singapore epidemiology of eye diseases study. Am J Ophthalmol 2019;206:48–73. 10.1016/j.ajo.2019.05.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120.Qiu P, Zeng M, Kuang W, et al. Heterogeneity in the dynamic change of cognitive function among older Chinese people: a growth mixture model. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2020;35:1123–33. 10.1002/gps.5334 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121.Liao J-Y, Lee CT-C, Lin T-Y, et al. Exploring prior diseases associated with incident late-onset Alzheimer's disease dementia. PLoS One 2020;15:e0228172. 10.1371/journal.pone.0228172 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122.Swenor BK, Wang J, Varadaraj V, et al. Vision impairment and cognitive outcomes in older adults: the health ABC study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2019;74:1454–60. 10.1093/gerona/gly244 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123.Creavin ST, Wisniewski S, Noel-Storr AH. Mini-Mental state examination (MMSE) for the detection of dementia in clinically unevaluated people aged 65 and over in community and primary care populations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016:CD011145. 10.1002/14651858.CD011145.pub2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124.Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12:189–98. 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125.Whitson HE, Cronin-Golomb A, Cruickshanks KJ, et al. American geriatrics Society and National Institute on aging bench-to-bedside conference: sensory impairment and cognitive decline in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2018;66:2052–8. 10.1111/jgs.15506 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126.Maharani A, Dawes P, Nazroo J, et al. Cataract surgery and age-related cognitive decline: a 13-year follow-up of the English longitudinal study of ageing. PLoS One 2018;13:e0204833. 10.1371/journal.pone.0204833 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127.Pye A, Charalambous AP, Leroi I, et al. Screening tools for the identification of dementia for adults with age-related acquired hearing or vision impairment: a scoping review. Int Psychogeriatr 2017;29:1771–84. 10.1017/S104161021700120X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary data

bmjopen-2020-047929supp001.pdf (66.7KB, pdf)

Supplementary data

bmjopen-2020-047929supp002.pdf (50.4KB, pdf)

Supplementary data

bmjopen-2020-047929supp003.pdf (30.8KB, pdf)

Reviewer comments
Author's manuscript

Data Availability Statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as online supplemental information.


Articles from BMJ Open are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES