ArticleBehavior genetics2024
A Note on Modelling Bidirectional Feedback Loops in Mendelian Randomization Studies.
Article in Behavior genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating the pathogenesis of urolithiasis through gut microbiome, plasma metabolome and inflammatory proteome: a mediation Mendelian randomization study.Clinical epigenetics · 2025Article
- Measurement Error and Power in Family-Based Extensions to Mendelian Randomization.Behavior genetics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Structural equation models (SEMs) involving feedback loops may offer advantages over standard instrumental variables estimators in terms of modelling causal effects in the presence of bidirectional relationships. In the following note, we show that in the case of a single "exposure" and "outcome" variable, modelling relationships using a SEM with a simple bidirectional linear feedback loop offers no advantage over traditional instrumental variables estimators in terms of consistency (i.e. both approaches yield consistent estimates of the causal effect, provided that causal estimates are obtained in both directions). In the case of finite samples, traditional IV estimators and SEM exhibited similar power across many of the conditions we examined, although which method performed best depended on the residual correlation between variables and the strength of the instruments. In particular, the power of SEM was insensitive to the residual correlation between variables, whereas the power of the Wald estimator/2SLS improved (deteriorated) relative to SEM as the magnitude of the residual correlation increased (decreased) assuming a positive causal effect of the exposure on the outcome. The power of SEM improved relative to the Wald estimator/2SLS as the instruments explained more residual variance in the "outcome" variable.
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.