ArticleFrontiers in genetics2021
Credible Mendelian Randomization Studies in the Presence of Selection Bias Using Control Exposures.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using Negative Control Outcomes to Detect Selection Bias in Mendelian Randomization Studies.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Insomnia, sleep duration and incident Parkinson's disease in the Finnish population cohort.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Genetic Evidence of Causal Effect between C1q/TNF-Related Protein-1 and Atherosclerosis: a Bidirectional and Multivariate Mendelian Randomization Study.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2025Article
- A translational framework of genoproteomic studies for cardiovascular drug discovery.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2024Article
- A framework for assessing selection and misclassification bias in mendelian randomisation studies: an illustrative example between body mass index and covid-19.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Article
- Roles of 21 Genera of Human Gut Microbiota in Barrett's Esophagus Risk: A Mendelian Randomization Study.Frontiers in genetics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Selection bias is increasingly acknowledged as a limitation of Mendelian randomization (MR). However, few methods exist to assess this issue. We focus on two plausible causal structures relevant to MR studies and illustrate the data-generating process underlying selection 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.