ArticleDiabetologia2016
Can genetic evidence help us to understand the fetal origins of type 2 diabetes?
Article in Diabetologia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maternal and fetal genetic effects on birth weight and their relevance to cardio-metabolic risk factors.Nature genetics · 2019Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of epigenome-wide association studies in neonates reveals widespread differential DNA methylation associated with birthweight.Nature communications · 2019Pooled it
- Two decades since the fetal insulin hypothesis: what have we learned from genetics?Diabetologia · 2021Review
- Mendelian randomization study of maternal influences on birthweight and future cardiometabolic risk in the HUNT cohort.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Genetically Determined Birthweight Associates With Atrial Fibrillation: A Mendelian Randomization Study.Circulation. Genomic and precision medicine · 2020Article
- Using Mendelian randomization to determine causal effects of maternal pregnancy (intrauterine) exposures on offspring outcomes: Sources of bias and methods for assessing them.Wellcome open research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Lower birthweight is consistently associated with a higher risk of type 2 diabetes in observational studies, but the mechanisms underlying this association are not fully understood. Animal models and studies of famine-exposed populations have provided support for the developmental origins hypothesis, under which exposure to poor intrauterine nutrition results in reduced fetal growth and also contributes to the developmental programming of later type 2 diabetes risk. However, testing this hypothesis is difficult in human studies and studies aiming to do so are mostly observational and have limited scope for causal inference due to the presence of confounding factors. In this issue of Diabetologia, Wang et al (doi: 10.1007/s00125-016-4019-z ) have used genetic variation associated with birthweight in a Mendelian randomisation analysis to assess evidence of a causal link between fetal growth and type 2 diabetes. Mendelian randomisation offers the potential to examine associations between exposures and outcomes in the absence of factors that would normally confound observational studies. This commentary discusses the results of the Mendelian randomisation study carried out by Wang et al, in relation to the study design and its limitations. Challenges and opportunities for future studies are also outlined.
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.