ArticleBMC global and public health2025
Investigating causal effects of income on health using two-sample Mendelian randomisation.
Article in BMC global and public health, 2025. 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.
- Determinants of proactive health behaviors in individuals at high risks of stroke: a structural equation model analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncome is associated with many health outcomes, but it is unclear how far this reflects a causal relationship. Mendelian randomisation (MR) uses genetic variation between individuals to investigate causal effects and may overcome some of the confounding issues inherent in many observational study designs.
methodsWe used two-sample MR using data from unrelated individuals to estimate the effect of log occupational income on indicators of mental health, physical health, and health-related behaviours. We investigated pleiotropy (direct effects of genotype on the outcome) using robust MR estimators, CAUSE, and multivariable MR including education as a co-exposure. We also investigated demographic factors and dynastic effects using within-family analyses, and misspecification of the primary phenotype using bidirectional MR and Steiger filtering.
resultsWe found that a 10% increase in income lowered the odds of depression (OR 0.92 [95% CI 0.86-0.98]), death (0.91 [0.86-0.96]), and ever-smoking (OR 0.91 [0.86-0.96]), and reduced BMI (- 0.06 SD [- 0.11, - 0.003]). We found little evidence of an effect on alcohol consumption (- 0.02 SD [- 0.01, 0.05]) or subjective wellbeing (0.02 SD [- 0.003, 0.04]), or on two negative control outcomes, childhood asthma (OR 0.99 [0.87, 1.13]) and birth weight (- 0.02 SD, [- 0.01, 0.05]). Within-family analysis and multivariable MR including education and income were imprecise, and there was substantial overlap between the genotypes associated with income and education: out of 36 genetic variants significantly associated with income, 29 were also significantly associated with education.
conclusionsMR evidence provides some limited support for causal effects of income on some mental health outcomes and health behaviours, but the lack of reliable evidence from approaches accounting for family-level confounding and potential pleiotropic effects of education places considerable caveats on this conclusion. MR may nevertheless be a useful complement to other observational study designs since its assumptions and limitations are radically different. Further research is needed using larger family-based genetic cohorts, and investigating the overlap between income and other socioeconomic measures.
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.