Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38974363›Full record

SynthesisWellcome open research2022

Systematic review and meta-analyses: What has the application of Mendelian randomization told us about the causal effect of adiposity on health outcomes?

Matthew A Lee, Charlie Hatcher, Luke A McGuinness, Nancy McBride, Thomas Battram, Wenxin Wan, Si Fang, Kaitlin H Wade, Laura J Corbin, Nicholas J Timpson

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Wellcome open research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. 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

10 authors.

Matthew A LeeMedical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6262-3447
Charlie HatcherMedical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.
Luke A McGuinness *Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.
Nancy McBride *Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.
Thomas Battram *Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.
Wenxin Wan *Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1957-4034
Si Fang *Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4934-1212
Kaitlin H WadeMedical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3362-6280
Laura J CorbinMedical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.
Nicholas J TimpsonMedical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7141-9189

Funding

Wellcome TrustWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mendelian randomization (MR) is increasingly used for generating estimates of the causal impact of exposures on outcomes. Evidence suggests a causal role of excess adipose tissue (adiposity) on many health outcomes. However, this body of work has not been systematically appraised. We systematically reviewed and meta-analysed results from MR studies investigating the association between adiposity and health outcomes prior to the SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic (PROSPERO: CRD42018096684). We searched Medline, EMBASE, and bioRxiv up to February 2019 and obtained data on 2,214 MR analyses from 173 included articles. 29 meta-analyses were conducted using data from 34 articles (including 66 MR analyses) and results not able to be meta-analysed were narratively synthesised. Body mass index (BMI) was the predominant exposure used and was primarily associated with an increase in investigated outcomes; the largest effect in the meta-analyses was observed for the association between BMI and polycystic ovary syndrome (estimates reflect odds ratios (OR) per standard deviation change in each adiposity measure): OR = 2.55; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.22-5.33. Only colorectal cancer was investigated with two exposures in the meta-analysis: BMI (OR = 1.18; 95% CI = 1.01-1.37) and waist-hip ratio (WHR; OR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.08-2.03). Broadly, results were consistent across the meta-analyses and narrative synthesis. Consistent with many observational studies, this work highlights the impact of adiposity across a broad spectrum of health outcomes, enabling targeted follow-up analyses. However, missing and incomplete data mean results should be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

adiposityepidemiologyMendelian randomizationobesitySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38974363
PMCPMC11225060

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.