ArticleScientific reports2024
Evaluating the impact of smoking on the risk of dry eye disease: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic evidence against a causal relationship between myocardial infarction and urological malignancies.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Article
- Telomere length promotes colorectal cancer through dual parallel pathways involving growth signaling and protein metabolism.Tropical medicine and health · 2025Article
- Genetic evidence for causal effects of inflammatory protein factors on breast cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Genetic evidence for causal relationships between vegetarian biomarkers and esophageal cancer risk.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Impact of smoking exposure on meibomian gland morphology and tear film stability: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Telomere Length and Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: Unraveling Causal Mechanisms Through Integrative Genetic and Single-Cell Transcriptomic Analysis.Mediators of inflammation · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dry Eye Disease (DED) is a common condition worldwide, with smoking being recognized as a possible aggravating factor. Although observational studies have indicated a potential correlation, the findings have been inconclusive. In the study, Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis is used to investigate this potential causal relationship. Adhering to STROBE-MR guidelines, a MR analysis was conducted using genetic instrumental variables from Genome-wide association studies (GWAS). The research investigated the impact of various smoking-related exposures (regular smoking, lifetime smoking, smoking intensity, and smoking cessation) on DED as an outcome. Three distinct methodologies were employed: the inverse variance weighted (IVW) method, the MR-Egger method, and the weighted median (WM) method. To ensure the robustness of the MR results, sensitivity analyses were conducted. In MR analyses, it was observed that both lifetime smoking and regular smoking were associated with a significant increase in the risk of DED (IVW method: P < 0.05). The results indicated that the odds ratios (ORs) for lifetime smoking and regular smoking in relation to DED were 1.757 (95% CI 1.021-3.025) and 2.121 (95% CI 1.017-4.423), respectively. However, there was no significant correlation found between smoking intensity, cessation, and the risk of DED. This study presents genetic evidence indicating that long-term smoking could potentially be a causal risk factor for DED. Subsequent research will need to conduct specifically designed randomized controlled trials to further investigate this association.
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.