SynthesisPaediatric and perinatal epidemiology2021
Mendelian randomisation approaches to the study of prenatal exposures: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology using Mendelian randomization (STROBE-MR): a Korean translation of explanation and elaboration.Ewha medical journal · 2025Guideline
- Tools for assessing quality and risk of bias in Mendelian randomization studies: a systematic review.International journal of epidemiology · 2023Pooled it
- Mendelian randomisation approaches to the study of prenatal exposures: A systematic review.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2021Pooled it
- Review
- Genetically Informed Research Designs in Perinatal Pharmacoepidemiology: A Methodological Overview.Drug safety · 2026Review
- Selection Biases in Perinatal Research: A Comparison of Inverse Probability Weighting, Instrumental Variable and Sibling-Comparison Design.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2026Article
- Extending the Use of Mendelian Randomisation With Non-Inherited Variants to Assess Socially Transmitted Parental Exposures Under Assortative Mating.Genetic epidemiology · 2026Article
- Causal association between EBV and gastritis, gastric cancer, and gastric ulcer: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Associations between 25 hydroxyvitamin D concentration and spontaneous abortion.BMC public health · 2024Article
- The Application of Mendelian Randomization in Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction: Current Status and Future Prospects.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Dietary Patterns, Food Intake and Health: New Evidence from Epidemiological and Genetic Studies.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Bounding the average causal effect in Mendelian randomisation studies with multiple proposed instruments: An application to prenatal alcohol exposure and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2023Article
- Exploring and mitigating potential bias when genetic instrumental variables are associated with multiple non-exposure traits in Mendelian randomization.European journal of epidemiology · 2022Article
- Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology using mendelian randomisation (STROBE-MR): explanation and elaboration.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- Causal inference with observational data: the need for triangulation of evidence.Psychological medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMendelian randomisation (MR) designs apply instrumental variable techniques using genetic variants to study causal effects. MR is increasingly used to evaluate the role of maternal exposures during pregnancy on offspring health.
objectivesWe review the application of MR to prenatal exposures and describe reporting of methodologic challenges in this area. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Medline Ovid, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Eligible studies met the following criteria: (a) a maternal pregnancy exposure; (b) an outcome assessed in offspring of the pregnancy; and (c) a genetic variant or score proposed as an instrument or proxy for an exposure. SYNTHESIS: We quantified the frequency of reporting of MR conditions stated, techniques used to examine assumption plausibility, and reported limitations.
resultsForty-three eligible studies were identified. When discussing challenges or limitations, the most common issues described were known potential biases in the broader MR literature, including population stratification (n = 29), weak instrument bias (n = 18), and certain types of pleiotropy (n = 30). Of 22 studies presenting point estimates for the effect of exposure, four defined their causal estimand. Twenty-four studies discussed issues unique to prenatal MR, including selection on pregnancy (n = 1) and pleiotropy via postnatal exposure (n = 10) or offspring genotype (n = 20).
conclusionsPrenatal MR studies frequently discuss issues that affect all MR studies, but rarely discuss problems specific to the prenatal context, including selection on pregnancy and effects of postnatal exposure. Future prenatal MR studies should report and attempt to falsify their assumptions, with particular attention to issues specific to prenatal MR. Further research is needed to evaluate the impacts of biases unique to prenatal MR in practice.
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.