Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27486138›Full record

ReviewJournal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN2016

Mendelian Randomization as an Approach to Assess Causality Using Observational Data.

Peggy Sekula, Fabiola Del Greco M, Cristian Pattaro, Anna Köttgen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06666647 (Ambulance and Helicopter Response Times in Danish Emergency Medical Services), which is not on this map. Cited by 1,371 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1,371citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06666647 active not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Ambulance and Helicopter Response Times in Danish Emergency Medical Services: Protocol for an Epidemiological Study. The AHRTEMIS Study

TypeobservationalSponsorPeter Martin HansenRan2025 to 2026Enrolled2,500,000ConditionsEmergency Medical Services, Response, Triage, Survival OutcomesArmsTreatment by ambulance or helicopter services with response times
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1,371 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. How gut microbiome and blood metabolites drive ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the spine: a genome-wide association study based on the East Asian population.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Genetic interconnections between personality-related phenotypes and psychiatric disorders.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

1,311 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Peggy SekulaDivision of Genetic Epidemiology, Institute for Medical Biometry and Statistics and ps@imbi.uni-freiburg.de.
Fabiola Del Greco MCenter for Biomedicine, European Academy of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy.
Cristian PattaroCenter for Biomedicine, European Academy of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy.
Anna KöttgenDivision of Genetic Epidemiology, Institute for Medical Biometry and Statistics and.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mendelian randomization refers to an analytic approach to assess the causality of an observed association between a modifiable exposure or risk factor and a clinically relevant outcome. It presents a valuable tool, especially when randomized controlled trials to examine causality are not feasible and observational studies provide biased associations because of confounding or reverse causality. These issues are addressed by using genetic variants as instrumental variables for the tested exposure: the alleles of this exposure-associated genetic variant are randomly allocated and not subject to reverse causation. This, together with the wide availability of published genetic associations to screen for suitable genetic instrumental variables make Mendelian randomization a time- and cost-efficient approach and contribute to its increasing popularity for assessing and screening for potentially causal associations. An observed association between the genetic instrumental variable and the outcome supports the hypothesis that the exposure in question is causally related to the outcome. This review provides an overview of the Mendelian randomization method, addresses assumptions and implications, and includes illustrative examples. We also discuss special issues in nephrology, such as inverse risk factor associations in advanced disease, and outline opportunities to design Mendelian randomization studies around kidney function and disease.

Indexed as

CausalityMendelian Randomization AnalysisCardiovascular DiseasesHumansObservational Studies as TopicRenal Insufficiency, Chroniccausalitymendelian randomizationstatistical method

Identifiers

PMID27486138
PMCPMC5084898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.