ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2021
The use of two-sample methods for Mendelian randomization analyses on single large datasets.
Article in International journal of epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 209 papers, 8 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
209 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Genome- and epigenome-wide association studies identify susceptibility of CpG sites and regions for metabolic syndrome in a Korean population.Clinical epigenetics · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Alcohol consumption and its association with cancer, cardiovascular, liver and brain diseases: a systematic review of Mendelian randomization studies.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2024Pooled it
- Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin and Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Men and Women.Clinical chemistry · 2023Pooled it
- Cross-fitted instrument: A blueprint for one-sample Mendelian randomization.PLoS computational biology · 2022Pooled it
- Obesity and Kidney Function: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.Clinical chemistry · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic review of Mendelian randomization studies on risk of cancer.BMC medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Migraines and the association of cognitive impairment: a one- and two-sample mendelian randomization analysis.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2026Article
- Mobile Phone Call Duration and Cardiovascular Outcomes: Prospective and Genetic Evidence on a Potential Depression-Related Pathway.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The impact for causal associations between common diseases and inflammatory bowel disease: a disease-wide bidirectional Mendelian randomization study.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Genome-wide DNA methylation analysis revealed epigenetic mechanism underlying end-stage renal disease.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor activation and mental health: a drug-target mendelian randomization study.Translational psychiatry · 2026Article
- Causal association between rheumatoid arthritis and periodontitis: A Mendelian randomization study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Causal effects of 32 eating habits on ischemic stroke risk and post-stroke functional outcome: A Mendelian randomization study.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
- The role of lipid-lowering drugs in urologic and male reproductive cancers: a Mendelian randomization study.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Causal effects of oral microbiome traits on female reproductive diseases: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Multi-omics integration predicts the incidence of 17 diseases in the UK Biobank.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Decoding causal m6A: a bioinformatics roadmap for psychiatric disorders.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Review
- The genetic associations of DNAJC family members with Parkinson's disease: comprehensive evidence from burden analysis and Mendelian randomization.Human genetics · 2026Article
149 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith genome-wide association data for many exposures and outcomes now available from large biobanks, one-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) is increasingly used to investigate causal relationships. Many robust MR methods are available to address pleiotropy, but these assume independence between the gene-exposure and gene-outcome association estimates. Unlike in two-sample MR, in one-sample MR the two estimates are obtained from the same individuals, and the assumption of independence does not hold in the presence of confounding.
methodsWith simulations mimicking a typical study in UK Biobank, we assessed the performance, in terms of bias and precision of the MR estimate, of the fixed-effect and (multiplicative) random-effects meta-analysis method, weighted median estimator, weighted mode estimator and MR-Egger regression, used in both one-sample and two-sample data. We considered scenarios differing by the: presence/absence of a true causal effect; amount of confounding; and presence and type of pleiotropy (none, balanced or directional).
resultsEven in the presence of substantial correlation due to confounding, all two-sample methods used in one-sample MR performed similarly to when used in two-sample MR, except for MR-Egger which resulted in bias reflecting direction and magnitude of the confounding. Such bias was much reduced in the presence of very high variability in instrument strength across variants (IGX2 of 97%).
conclusionsTwo-sample MR methods can be safely used for one-sample MR performed within large biobanks, expect for MR-Egger. MR-Egger is not recommended for one-sample MR unless the correlation between the gene-exposure and gene-outcome estimates due to confounding can be kept low, or the variability in instrument strength is very high.
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.