Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36572895›Full record

ReviewJournal of translational medicine2022

Mendelian randomization analyses in ocular disease: a powerful approach to causal inference with human genetic data.

Jiaxin Li, Cong Li, Yu Huang, Peng Guan, Desheng Huang, Honghua Yu, Xiaohong Yang, Lei Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Mendelian Randomization in Eye Research: Powerful, but Prone to Misuse.Translational vision science & technology · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jiaxin Li *Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Cong Li *Guangdong Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Yu HuangGuangdong Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Peng GuanDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Desheng HuangDepartment of Mathematics, School of Fundamental Sciences, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Honghua YuGuangdong Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, 510080, China.
Xiaohong YangGuangdong Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, 510080, China. syyangxh@scut.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0001-9466-7591
Lei LiuGuangdong Eye Institute, Department of Ophthalmology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, 510080, China. liuleijiao@163.com.
Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences · CNChina Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ophthalmic epidemiology is concerned with the prevalence, distribution and other factors relating to human eye disease. While observational studies cannot avoid confounding factors from interventions, human eye composition and structure are unique, thus, eye disease pathogenesis, which greatly impairs quality of life and visual health, remains to be fully explored. Notwithstanding, inheritance has had a vital role in ophthalmic disease. Mendelian randomization (MR) is an emerging method that uses genetic variations as instrumental variables (IVs) to avoid confounders and reverse causality issues; it reveals causal relationships between exposure and a range of eyes disorders. Thus far, many MR studies have identified potentially causal associations between lifestyles or biological exposures and eye diseases, thus providing opportunities for further mechanistic research, and interventional development. However, MR results/data must be interpreted based on comprehensive evidence, whereas MR applications in ophthalmic epidemiology have some limitations worth exploring. Here, we review key principles, assumptions and MR methods, summarise contemporary evidence from MR studies on eye disease and provide new ideas uncovering aetiology in ophthalmology.

Indexed as

Eye DiseasesMendelian Randomization AnalysisCausalityGenetic VariationHuman GeneticsHumansQuality of LifeCausalityEye diseaseInstrumental variablesMendelian randomization

Identifiers

PMID36572895
PMCPMC9793675
OpenAlexW4312218877

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.