Secondary service connection
Cataract extraction secondary to diabetes: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided cataract extraction claimed as secondary to diabetes in 340 decisions. It granted the issue in 23.2% of them, above the 11.3% grant rate for all cataract extraction issues, denied it in 27.4%, and remanded it in 47.9%. Counting only decisions on the merits, 45.9% were granted.
Decisions
340
2018–2026
Granted
23.2%
All cataract extraction: 11.3%
Granted on the merits
45.9%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
47.9%
Denied: 27.4%
See all cataract extraction decisions, direct and secondary.
Cataract extraction secondary to diabetes: outcomes by year
| Year | Decisions | Granted | Denied | Remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 52 | 21.2% | 19.2% | 57.7% |
| 2019 | 42 | 16.7% | 42.9% | 38.1% |
| 2020 | 39 | 12.8% | 33.3% | 53.8% |
| 2021 | 46 | 15.2% | 37.0% | 45.7% |
| 2022 | 48 | 27.1% | 25.0% | 47.9% |
| 2023 | 48 | 27.1% | 22.9% | 47.9% |
| 2024 | 33 | 45.5% | 12.1% | 39.4% |
| 2025 | 24 | 20.8% | 29.2% | 50.0% |
Evidence in granted and denied cataract extraction decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the cataract extraction issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive nexus opinion | 72 | 78.0% | 29.2% | +48.8 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 58 | 73.3% | 36.2% | +37.1 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 103 | 51.5% | 42.3% | +9.2 pts |
| Lay statement | 249 | 40.3% | 65.8% | −25.5 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 75.9% of the decisions that granted cataract extraction.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 21.5% of grants and 10.8% of denials.
Negative evidence in the record
An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often cataract extraction was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative nexus opinion | 219 | 42.7% | 52.7% | −10.0 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 254 | 43.4% | 55.6% | −12.2 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied cataract extraction
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established16
- Caused by the service-connected disability11
- Service connection established10
- Aggravated by the service-connected disability2
- No contrary evidence of record2
Most common reasons in denials
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim16
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service15
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis13
- Service records negative or silent8
- Current diagnosis established3
- Service connection for diabetes mellitus denied2
- Service connection established2
- VA examiner opined cataracts were age-related2
Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.
Recent cataract extraction decisions
Granted
Favorable findings from AOJ regarding current diagnosis and service-connected diabetes mellitus are binding.; Private and VA treatment records indicate cataracts were associated with diabetes.; VA examiner's negative opinion was inconsistent with treatment records and afforded no probative value.
Current diagnosis of bilateral cataracts; Service-connected diabetes mellitus type 2; Medical opinion notes diabetes accelerates age-related cataracts; Benefit of the doubt applied
Conceded current diagnosis of pseudophakia; Veteran service-connected for diabetes mellitus; VA opinion found diabetes mellitus contributed to cataracts
Denied
No in-service complaints, treatment, or diagnosis for eye condition.; Separation examination showed normal eyes.; VA opinions found cataracts age-related and less likely than not caused by or related to diabetes.; No established baseline for aggravation due to diabetes.; No probative evidence of etiological link to service or diabetes.
No in-service event or injury documented; Cataract resolved prior to claim; No evidence of functional impairment or treatment
Current diagnoses of dry eye syndrome and residuals of bilateral cataracts; In-service injury/aggravation conceded, and service-connected for diabetes; All medical opinions against the claim, citing age-related changes and lack of in-service nexus
Rules that apply to secondary cataract extraction claims
- 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - M21-1 V.ii.2.D
Secondary service connection and aggravation of non-service-connected disabilities
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your cataract extraction case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Counts decisions in which the Board decided a cataract extraction issue claimed as secondary to diabetes, by the outcome of that issue.
- The primary disability is read from the decision text ("secondary to …") and grouped by name, so spellings such as "PTSD" and "posttraumatic stress disorder" count together.
- Secondary claims also include aggravation of a non-service-connected condition by a service-connected one (38 CFR 3.310(b)).
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2018–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.