Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33961203›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2021

Mendelian randomisation for mediation analysis: current methods and challenges for implementation.

Alice R Carter, Eleanor Sanderson, Gemma Hammerton, Rebecca C Richmond, George Davey Smith, Jon Heron, Amy E Taylor, Neil M Davies, Laura D Howe

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2021. 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 778 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
778citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

778 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

718 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

9 authors.

Alice R CarterMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. alice.carter@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2817-4195
Eleanor SandersonMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Gemma HammertonMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Rebecca C RichmondMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
George Davey SmithMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Jon HeronMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Amy E TaylorMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Neil M DaviesMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Laura D HoweMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/2Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/5Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/7Medical Research Council MR/M020894/1Wellcome Trust 209138/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mediation analysis seeks to explain the pathway(s) through which an exposure affects an outcome. Traditional, non-instrumental variable methods for mediation analysis experience a number of methodological difficulties, including bias due to confounding between an exposure, mediator and outcome and measurement error. Mendelian randomisation (MR) can be used to improve causal inference for mediation analysis. We describe two approaches that can be used for estimating mediation analysis with MR: multivariable MR (MVMR) and two-step MR. We outline the approaches and provide code to demonstrate how they can be used in mediation analysis. We review issues that can affect analyses, including confounding, measurement error, weak instrument bias, interactions between exposures and mediators and analysis of multiple mediators. Description of the methods is supplemented by simulated and real data examples. Although MR relies on large sample sizes and strong assumptions, such as having strong instruments and no horizontally pleiotropic pathways, our simulations demonstrate that these methods are unaffected by confounders of the exposure or mediator and the outcome and non-differential measurement error of the exposure or mediator. Both MVMR and two-step MR can be implemented in both individual-level MR and summary data MR. MR mediation methods require different assumptions to be made, compared with non-instrumental variable mediation methods. Where these assumptions are more plausible, MR can be used to improve causal inference in mediation analysis.

Indexed as

Mediation AnalysisBiasCausalityGenetic PleiotropyGenetic VariationGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansMendelian Randomization AnalysisMediation analysisMendelian randomisationMultivariable Mendelian randomisationTwo-step Mendelian randomisation

Identifiers

PMID33961203
PMCPMC8159796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.