ArticleInternational journal of women's health2024
Causal Relationship Between Mood Swing and Gynecological Disorders: A Mendelian Randomization Study.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanotechnology in reproductive medicine: from gamete engineering to precision therapeutics.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Article
- The mediating role of biological age in the impact of mood instability symptoms on neurodegenerative disease and mortality.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- The causal relationship between hepatitis B, immunophenotypes and liver cancer: a Mendelian randomization study.Discover oncology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gynecological disorders are a wide range of health problems affecting the female reproductive system, which poses substantial health challenges worldwide. Increasing number of observational studies have associated mood instability to common female diseases, but the underlying causal relationship remains unclear. In this work, Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was applied to explore the genetically predicted causal relationship of mood swings and several prevalent gynecological disorders. Methods: Instrumental variables (IVs) of mood swings were selected from UK Biobank (UKB), with 204,412 cases and 247,207 controls being incorporated. The genetic variants for female disorders were obtained from genome-wide association studies (GWASs) and FinnGen consortium. To avoid biases caused by racial difference, only European population was included here. Five strong analytical methodologies were used to increase the validity of the results, the most substantial of which was the inverse variance weighting (IVW) method. Pleiotropy, sensitivity, and heterogeneity were assessed to strengthen the findings. Results: We found mood swings was significantly positively associated with risk of endometrial cancer (OR= 2.60 [95% CI= 1.36, 4.95], P= 0.0037), cervical cancer (OR= 1.01[95% CI= 1.00,1.02], P= 0.0213) and endometriosis (OR= 2.58 [95% CI= 1.18, 5.60], P= 0.0170) by IVW method. However, there was no causal relationship between mood swing and ovarian cancer. No pleiotropy and heterogeneity existed and sensitivity tests were passed. Conclusion: This study reveals that mood swing may serve as a genetically predicted causal risk factor for endometrial cancer, cervical cancer, and endometriosis in the European population, while no such association was observed for ovarian cancer. These findings make up for observational research's inherent limitations and may improve patient outcomes in the field of gynecological health. However, the study's focus on European populations may limit the applicability of these results globally.
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.