Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32155257›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2020

Empirical comparisons of multiple Mendelian randomization approaches in the presence of assortative mating.

Camelia C Minică, Dorret I Boomsma, Conor V Dolan, Eco de Geus, Michael C Neale

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Mendelian randomization.Nature reviews. Methods primers · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Camelia C MinicăDepartment of Biological Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam The Netherlands.
Dorret I BoomsmaDepartment of Biological Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam The Netherlands.
Conor V DolanDepartment of Biological Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam The Netherlands.
Eco de GeusDepartment of Biological Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam The Netherlands.
Michael C NealeDepartment of Biological Psychology, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam The Netherlands.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

Psychometric and Genetic Assessments of Substance UseR37DA018673 · NIDA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI NEALE, MICHAEL CHURTON · 2005 to 2014
$3.7M
Psychometric and Genetic Assessments of Substance UseR01DA018673 · NIDA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI NEALE, MICHAEL CHURTON · 2004 to 2019
$2.3M
Extensions of Mendelian Randomization Methodology for Combined Genomic and Methylomic AnalysisR01DA049867 · NIDA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI NEALE, MICHAEL CHURTON · 2020 to 2024
$1.9M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA018673NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA049867NIDA NIH HHS R37 DA018673
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMendelian randomization (MR) is widely used to unravel causal relationships in epidemiological studies. Whereas multiple MR methods have been developed to control for bias due to horizontal pleiotropy, their performance in the presence of other sources of bias, like non-random mating, has been mostly evaluated using simulated data. Empirical comparisons of MR estimators in such scenarios have yet to be conducted. Pleiotropy and non-random mating have been shown to account equally for the genetic correlation between height and educational attainment. Previous studies probing the causal nature of this association have produced conflicting results.

methodsWe estimated the causal effect of height on educational attainment in various MR models, including the MR-Egger and the MR-Direction of Causation (MR-DoC) models that correct for, or explicitly model, horizontal pleiotropy.

resultsWe reproduced the weak but positive association between height and education in the Netherlands Twin Register sample (P= 3.9 × 10-6). All MR analyses suggested that height has a robust, albeit small, causal effect on education. We showed via simulations that potential assortment for height and education had no effect on the causal parameter in the MR-DoC model. With the pleiotropic effect freely estimated, MR-DoC yielded a null finding.

conclusionsNon-random mating may have a bearing on the results of MR studies based on unrelated individuals. Family data enable tests of causal relationships to be conducted more rigorously, and are recommended to triangulate results of MR studies assessing pairs of traits leading to non-random mate selection.

Indexed as

Genetic PleiotropyMendelian Randomization AnalysisCausalityGenetic VariationHumansNetherlandseducational attainmentheightMendelian randomizationnon-random matingpleiotropy

Identifiers

PMID32155257
PMCPMC7660149
OpenAlexW3012503364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.