{"page":"https://casescribe.ai/explorer/conditions/eye-impairment","generated_at":"2026-10-03T18:33:57.551Z","data_as_of":{"decisions":944125,"first_year":2017,"last_year":2026,"latest_decision":"2026-04-30","cfr":"2026-10-01","m21":"2026-09-29"},"about":{"publisher":"CaseScribe AI (VA Law Explorer)","source":"Public Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions (appeals of VA decisions, not VA's first decisions), M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual, 38 CFR Parts 3 and 4.","method":"Outcomes are issue-level: each condition the Board decided in a decision counts once. Decision data is extracted by AI and can contain errors. Rates describe past appeals and do not predict any claim.","disclaimer":"For research only. CaseScribe AI is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Verify figures against the source decisions and regulations.","attribution":"Cite as: VA Law Explorer, CaseScribe AI, with the page URL."},"data":{"condition":"Eye impairment","all_conditions_granted_pct":19.4,"decisions":722,"years":"2017-2026","granted_pct":11.1,"denied_pct":39.8,"remanded_pct":48.2,"granted_on_merits_pct":21.8,"by_year":[{"year":2017,"issues":136,"granted_pct":10.3,"denied_pct":52.2,"remanded_pct":30.9},{"year":2018,"issues":175,"granted_pct":8.6,"denied_pct":46.9,"remanded_pct":38.9},{"year":2019,"issues":141,"granted_pct":12.1,"denied_pct":24.8,"remanded_pct":61.7},{"year":2020,"issues":59,"granted_pct":13.6,"denied_pct":42.4,"remanded_pct":42.4},{"year":2021,"issues":60,"granted_pct":11.7,"denied_pct":35,"remanded_pct":53.3},{"year":2022,"issues":53,"granted_pct":5.7,"denied_pct":32.1,"remanded_pct":60.4},{"year":2023,"issues":47,"granted_pct":0,"denied_pct":34,"remanded_pct":63.8},{"year":2024,"issues":52,"granted_pct":17.3,"denied_pct":28.8,"remanded_pct":50},{"year":2025,"issues":49,"granted_pct":14.3,"denied_pct":44.9,"remanded_pct":40.8}],"benefit_of_doubt_in_grants_pct":68.8,"evidence_on_merits":[{"evidence":"va_exam_favorable","decisions_with":59,"granted_pct_with":50,"granted_pct_without":17.6},{"evidence":"va_exam_unfavorable","decisions_with":535,"granted_pct_with":19,"granted_pct_without":39.2},{"evidence":"nexus_positive","decisions_with":71,"granted_pct_with":54,"granted_pct_without":16.7},{"evidence":"nexus_negative","decisions_with":399,"granted_pct_with":17.7,"granted_pct_without":29.8},{"evidence":"private_opinion","decisions_with":182,"granted_pct_with":33,"granted_pct_without":17.2},{"evidence":"lay_statement","decisions_with":582,"granted_pct_with":19.9,"granted_pct_without":34.8}],"top_reasons":{"granted":[{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":6},{"reason":"new and material evidence submitted since prior denial","decisions":2}],"denied":[{"reason":"preponderance of the evidence against the claim","decisions":43},{"reason":"va examiner: less likely than not related to service","decisions":28},{"reason":"no current diagnosis","decisions":22},{"reason":"service records negative or silent","decisions":14},{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":14},{"reason":"no in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis","decisions":9}]},"recent_examples":{"granted":[{"case_id":"A26026301","year":2026,"judge":"DELYVONNE M. WHITEHEAD","rationale":"20 percent rating assigned for dry eye syndrome; Bilateral condition affecting tearing and moisture; Rated by analogy to DC 6025 (Disorders of the lacrimal apparatus); Highest rating possible under DC 6025"},{"case_id":"A26019601","year":2026,"judge":"JOHN R. DOOLITTLE, II","rationale":"October 2024 VA examination showed corrected distance vision of 20/70 in both eyes.; This visual acuity meets the criteria for a 30 percent rating under DC 6066.; Rating granted from October 11, 2024, when the increase became factually ascertainable."},{"case_id":"25014505","year":2025,"judge":"HARVEY P. ROBERTS","rationale":"Disfigurement with asymmetry of one paired set of features (eyes); Visible tissue loss of the lower iris; Rating based on Diagnostic Code 7800"}],"denied":[{"case_id":"A26035176","year":2026,"judge":"JENNIFER WHITE","rationale":"VA examiners found eye disorder less likely than not related to service.; Chiropractor's opinion lacked medical rationale and qualifications.; Veteran's medical records showed no residuals from jet fuel incident."},{"case_id":"A26035113","year":2026,"judge":"R. BISIGNANI","rationale":"Already assigned maximum 20% rating under DC 6025; Symptoms adequately contemplated by schedular criteria; No visual acuity impairment or other eye conditions noted"},{"case_id":"A26017792","year":2026,"judge":"S. B. MAYS","rationale":"Corrected distance vision 20/40 in each eye is noncompensable under DC 6066.; No documented visual field defect, diplopia, or incapacitating episodes.; Symptoms of eye strain and headaches did not meet criteria for extraschedular consideration."}]},"how_va_rates":null,"rules":[]}}