ArticleStatistics in medicine2010
Bayesian methods for meta-analysis of causal relationships estimated using genetic instrumental variables.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Causal relationship between obesity and vitamin D status: bi-directional Mendelian randomization analysis of multiple cohorts.PLoS medicine · 2013Pooled it
- Association between C reactive protein and coronary heart disease: mendelian randomisation analysis based on individual participant data.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2011Pooled it
- Epidemiology, genetic epidemiology and Mendelian randomisation: more need than ever to attend to detail.Human genetics · 2020Article
- Plasma sRAGE Acts as a Genetically Regulated Causal Intermediate in Sepsis-associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2020Article
- A Bayesian approach to Mendelian randomization with multiple pleiotropic variants.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization: A review.Research synthesis methods · 2019Review
- Markers of endothelial dysfunction, coagulation and tissue fibrosis independently predict venous thromboembolism in HIV.AIDS (London, England) · 2011Article
- BAYESIAN METHODS FOR GENETIC ASSOCIATION ANALYSIS WITH HETEROGENEOUS SUBGROUPS: FROM META-ANALYSES TO GENE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTIONS.The annals of applied statisticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
117 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genetic markers can be used as instrumental variables, in an analogous way to randomization in a clinical trial, to estimate the causal relationship between a phenotype and an outcome variable. Our purpose is to extend the existing methods for such Mendelian randomization studies to the context of multiple genetic markers measured in multiple studies, based on the analysis of individual participant data. First, for a single genetic marker in one study, we show that the usual ratio of coefficients approach can be reformulated as a regression with heterogeneous error in the explanatory variable. This can be implemented using a Bayesian approach, which is next extended to include multiple genetic markers. We then propose a hierarchical model for undertaking a meta-analysis of multiple studies, in which it is not necessary that the same genetic markers are measured in each study. This provides an overall estimate of the causal relationship between the phenotype and the outcome, and an assessment of its heterogeneity across studies. As an example, we estimate the causal relationship of blood concentrations of C-reactive protein on fibrinogen levels using data from 11 studies. These methods provide a flexible framework for efficient estimation of causal relationships derived from multiple studies. Issues discussed include weak instrument bias, analysis of binary outcome data such as disease risk, missing genetic data, and the use of haplotypes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.