ArticlePLoS genetics2021
Assortative mating and within-spouse pair comparisons.
Article in PLoS genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of assortative mating, participation bias and socioeconomic status on the polygenic risk of behavioural and psychiatric traits.Nature human behaviour · 2024Pooled it
- Spousal Dementia Exposure and Risk of Dementia.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Differentiating mechanism from outcome for ancestry-assortative mating in admixed human populations.Genetics · 2025Article
- Differentiating mechanism from outcome for ancestry-assortative mating in admixed human populations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- An analysis of the accuracy of retrospective birth location recall using sibling data.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Aggregation of type-2 diabetes, prediabetes, and metabolic syndrome in German couples.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Correlations in sleeping patterns and circadian preference between spouses.Communications biology · 2023Article
- The collaborative study on the genetics of alcoholism: Genetics.Genes, brain, and behavior · 2023Review
- Partner choice, confounding and trait convergence all contribute to phenotypic partner similarity.Nature human behaviour · 2023Article
- Simultaneous inference of parental admixture proportions and admixture times from unphased local ancestry calls.American journal of human genetics · 2022Article
- Inflammatory bowel disease and cardiovascular disease: A two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Spousal comparisons have been proposed as a design that can both reduce confounding and estimate effects of the shared adulthood environment. However, assortative mating, the process by which individuals select phenotypically (dis)similar mates, could distort associations when comparing spouses. We evaluated the use of spousal comparisons, as in the within-spouse pair (WSP) model, for aetiological research such as genetic association studies. We demonstrated that the WSP model can reduce confounding but may be susceptible to collider bias arising from conditioning on assorted spouse pairs. Analyses using UK Biobank spouse pairs found that WSP genetic association estimates were smaller than estimates from random pairs for height, educational attainment, and BMI variants. Within-sibling pair estimates, robust to demographic and parental effects, were also smaller than random pair estimates for height and educational attainment, but not for BMI. WSP models, like other within-family models, may reduce confounding from demographic factors in genetic association estimates, and so could be useful for triangulating evidence across study designs to assess the robustness of findings. However, WSP estimates should be interpreted with caution due to potential collider bias.
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.