Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39812504›Full record

ArticleGenetic epidemiology2025

Multivariable MR Can Mitigate Bias in Two-Sample MR Using Covariable-Adjusted Summary Associations.

Joe Gilbody, Maria Carolina Borges, George Davey Smith, Eleanor Sanderson

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetic epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Assessing the causal effects of environmental tobacco smoke exposure: a meta-analytic Mendelian randomization study.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Joe GilbodyMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4603-8253
Maria Carolina BorgesMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7785-4547
George Davey SmithMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1407-8314
Eleanor SandersonMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5188-5775

Funding

The study was supported by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00032/1; MC_UU_00032/5) and British Heart Foundation (AA/18/7/34219).
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are hypothesis-free studies that estimate the association between polymorphisms across the genome with a trait of interest. To increase power and to estimate the direct effects of these single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) on a trait GWAS are often conditioned on a covariate (such as body mass index or smoking status). This adjustment can introduce bias in the estimated effect of the SNP on the trait. Two-sample Mendelian randomisation (MR) studies use summary statistics from GWAS estimate the causal effect of a risk factor (or exposure) on an outcome. Covariate adjustment in GWAS can bias the effect estimates obtained from MR studies conducted using covariate adjusted GWAS data. Multivariable MR (MVMR) is an extension of MR that includes multiple traits as exposures. Here we propose the use of MVMR to correct the bias in MR studies from covariate adjustment. We show how MVMR can recover unbiased estimates of the direct effect of the exposure of interest by including the covariate used to adjust the GWAS within the analysis. We apply this method to estimate the effect of systolic blood pressure on type-2 diabetes and the effect of waist circumference on systolic blood pressure. Our analytical and simulation results show that MVMR provides unbiased effect estimates for the exposure when either the exposure or outcome of interest has been adjusted for a covariate. Our results also highlight the parameters that determine when MR will be biased by GWAS covariate adjustment. The results from the applied analysis mirror these results, with equivalent results seen in the MVMR with and without adjusted GWAS. When GWAS results have been adjusted for a covariate, biasing MR effect estimates, direct effect estimates of an exposure on an outcome can be obtained by including that covariate as an additional exposure in an MVMR estimation. However, the estimated effect of the covariate obtained from the MVMR estimation is biased.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyMendelian Randomization AnalysisBiasBlood PressureBody Mass IndexComputer SimulationDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansModels, GeneticMultivariate AnalysisPolymorphism, Single NucleotideRisk FactorsWaist Circumference

Identifiers

PMID39812504
PMCPMC11734645

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.