Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38281297›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2024

Two sample Mendelian Randomisation using an outcome from a multilevel model of disease progression.

Michael Lawton, Yoav Ben-Shlomo, Apostolos Gkatzionis, Michele T Hu, Donald Grosset, Kate Tilling

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Michael LawtonPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Michael.Lawton@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3419-0354
Yoav Ben-ShlomoPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Apostolos GkatzionisPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Michele T HuNuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Oxford University and Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Donald GrossetSchool of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Kate TillingPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00011/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_00032/2Parkinsons UK J-1101Parkinsons UK J-1403
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying factors that are causes of disease progression, especially in neurodegenerative diseases, is of considerable interest. Disease progression can be described as a trajectory of outcome over time-for example, a linear trajectory having both an intercept (severity at time zero) and a slope (rate of change). A technique for identifying causal relationships between one exposure and one outcome in observational data whilst avoiding bias due to confounding is two sample Mendelian Randomisation (2SMR). We consider a multivariate approach to 2SMR using a multilevel model for disease progression to estimate the causal effect an exposure has on the intercept and slope. We carry out a simulation study comparing a naïve univariate 2SMR approach to a multivariate 2SMR approach with one exposure that effects both the intercept and slope of an outcome that changes linearly with time since diagnosis. The simulation study results, across six different scenarios, for both approaches were similar with no evidence against a non-zero bias and appropriate coverage of the 95% confidence intervals (for intercept 93.4-96.2% and the slope 94.5-96.0%). The multivariate approach gives a better joint coverage of both the intercept and slope effects. We also apply our method to two Parkinson's cohorts to examine the effect body mass index has on disease progression. There was no strong evidence that BMI affects disease progression, however the confidence intervals for both intercept and slope were wide.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionMendelian Randomization AnalysisBody Mass IndexCausalityComputer SimulationHumansParkinson DiseaseMultivariate meta-analysisParkinson’s diseaseTwo sample Mendelian Randomisation

Identifiers

PMID38281297
PMCPMC11219432

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.