ArticleHuman molecular genetics2023
Evaluating and implementing block jackknife resampling Mendelian randomization to mitigate bias induced by overlapping samples.
Article in Human molecular genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating relationships between loneliness, social isolation and health.Nature communications · 2026Article
- A structural mean modeling Mendelian randomization approach to investigate the lifecourse effect of adiposity: applied and methodological considerations.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- ONMR: an orthopedic and nutritional Mendelian randomization database.NPJ science of food · 2025Article
- Exploring pleiotropy in Mendelian randomisation analyses: What are genetic variants associated with 'cigarette smoking initiation' really capturing?Genetic epidemiology · 2025Article
- Association between alcohol consumption and incidence of dementia in current drinkers: linear and non-linear mendelian randomization analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- GWAS advancements to investigate disease associations and biological mechanisms.Clinical and translational discovery · 2024Article
- The Application of Mendelian Randomization in Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction: Current Status and Future Prospects.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Characterizing the Causal Pathway From Childhood Adiposity to Right Heart Physiology and Pulmonary Circulation Using Lifecourse Mendelian Randomization.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- A lifecourse Mendelian randomization study uncovers age-dependent effects of adiposity on asthma risk.iScience · 2023Article
- Low levels of small HDL particles predict but do not influence risk of sepsis.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Article
- Article
- A Guide for Understanding and Designing Mendelian Randomization Studies in the Musculoskeletal Field.JBMR plus · 2022Review
- A lifecourse mendelian randomization study highlights the long-term influence of childhood body size on later life heart structure.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Mendelian randomization.Nature reviews. Methods primers · 2022Article
- Statistical methods for Mendelian randomization in genome-wide association studies: A review.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022Review
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
Participant overlap can induce overfitting bias into Mendelian randomization (MR) and polygenic risk score (PRS) studies. Here, we evaluated a block jackknife resampling framework for genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and PRS construction to mitigate overfitting bias in MR analyses and implemented this study design in a causal inference setting using data from the UK Biobank. We simulated PRS and MR under three scenarios: (1) using weighted SNP estimates from an external GWAS, (2) using weighted SNP estimates from an overlapping GWAS sample and (3) using a block jackknife resampling framework. Based on a P-value threshold to derive genetic instruments for MR studies (P < 5 × 10-8) and a 10% variance in the exposure explained by all SNPs, block-jackknifing PRS did not suffer from overfitting bias (mean R2 = 0.034) compared with the externally weighted PRS (mean R2 = 0.040). In contrast, genetic instruments derived from overlapping samples explained a higher variance (mean R2 = 0.048) compared with the externally derived score. Overfitting became considerably more severe when using a more liberal P-value threshold to construct PRS (e.g. P < 0.05, overlapping sample PRS mean R2 = 0.103, externally weighted PRS mean R2 = 0.086), whereas estimates using jackknife score remained robust to overfitting (mean R2 = 0.084). Using block jackknife resampling MR in an applied analysis, we examined the effects of body mass index on circulating biomarkers which provided comparable estimates to an externally weighted instrument, whereas the overfitted scores typically provided narrower confidence intervals. Furthermore, we extended this framework into sex-stratified, multivariate and bidirectional settings to investigate the effect of childhood body size on adult testosterone levels.
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.