ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024
Celiac disease and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a bidirectional Mendelian randomization analysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing the causal association between celiac disease and autism spectrum disorder: A two-sample Mendelian randomization approach.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recent observational research suggests a potential link between celiac disease (CeD) and an increased incidence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, the genetic relationship between CeD and ADHD remains unclear. In order to assess the potential genetic causality between these two conditions, we conducted a Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis. Methods: We performed a bidirectional MR analysis to investigate the relationship between CeD and ADHD. We carefully selected single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from publicly available large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS) databases, employing rigorous quality screening criteria. MR estimates were obtained using four different methods: fixed-effect inverse variance weighted (fe-IVW), random-effect inverse variance weighting (re-IVW), weighted median (WM), and MR-Egger. The robustness and reliability of our findings were confirmed through sensitivity analyses, assessment of instrumental variable (IV) strength (F-statistic), and statistical power calculations. Results: Our MR analyses did not reveal any significant genetic associations between CeD and ADHD (fe-IVW: OR = 1.003, 95% CI = 0.932-1.079, P = 0.934). Similarly, in the reverse direction analysis, we found no evidence supporting a genetic relationship between ADHD and CeD (fe-IVW: OR = 0.850, 95% CI = 0.591-1.221, P = 0.378). Various MR approaches consistently yielded similar results. Sensitivity analysis indicated the absence of significant horizontal pleiotropy or heterogeneity. However, it's important to note that the limited statistical power of our study may have constrained the causal analysis of the exposure's influence on the outcome. Conclusions: Our findings do not provide compelling evidence for a genetic association between CeD and ADHD within the European population. While the statistical power of our study was limited, future MR research could benefit from larger-scale datasets or datasets involving similar traits. To validate our results in real-world scenarios, further mechanistic studies, large-sample investigations, multicenter collaborations, and longitudinal studies are warranted.
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.