Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36273411›Full record

ReviewGenetic epidemiology2023

Statistical methods for cis-Mendelian randomization with two-sample summary-level data.

Apostolos Gkatzionis, Stephen Burgess, Paul J Newcombe

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genetic epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 103 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
103citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
27.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

103 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 156 citations in OpenAlex.

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

43 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Apostolos GkatzionisMRC Biostatistics Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4942-0025
Stephen BurgessMRC Biostatistics Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5365-8760
Paul J NewcombeMRC Biostatistics Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation CH/12/2/29428British Heart Foundation RG/13/13/30194British Heart Foundation RG/18/13/33946Medical Research Council MC_PC_17228Medical Research Council MC_QA137853Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/7Medical Research Council RG88311Wellcome Trust 204623
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mendelian randomization (MR) is the use of genetic variants to assess the existence of a causal relationship between a risk factor and an outcome of interest. Here, we focus on two-sample summary-data MR analyses with many correlated variants from a single gene region, particularly on cis-MR studies which use protein expression as a risk factor. Such studies must rely on a small, curated set of variants from the studied region; using all variants in the region requires inverting an ill-conditioned genetic correlation matrix and results in numerically unstable causal effect estimates. We review methods for variable selection and estimation in cis-MR with summary-level data, ranging from stepwise pruning and conditional analysis to principal components analysis, factor analysis, and Bayesian variable selection. In a simulation study, we show that the various methods have comparable performance in analyses with large sample sizes and strong genetic instruments. However, when weak instrument bias is suspected, factor analysis and Bayesian variable selection produce more reliable inferences than simple pruning approaches, which are often used in practice. We conclude by examining two case studies, assessing the effects of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol and serum testosterone on coronary heart disease risk using variants in the HMGCR and SHBG gene regions, respectively.

Indexed as

Mendelian Randomization AnalysisModels, GeneticBayes TheoremCausalityHumansRisk FactorsBayesian variable selectioncorrelated instrumentsfactor analysisMendelian randomizationprincipal components analysispruning

Identifiers

PMID36273411
PMCPMC7614127
OpenAlexW4307106797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.