RevieweGastroenterology2024
Mendelian randomisation analysis for intestinal disease: achievement and future.
Review in eGastroenterology, 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.
- The tissue-specific effects of glucose-lowering drug targets on aging mediated through DNA methylation: a multi-omics genetic study.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and exocrine and endocrine pancreatic diseases: results from a prospective cohort study and Mendelian randomization.Gastroenterology report · 2026Article
- Genome-wide association and integrative analyses of relative handgrip strength identify polygenic determinants of gastrointestinal disorder susceptibility.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- From gut to pancreas: Shared genetic susceptibility and biological convergence in acute pancreatitis and Crohn's disease.PloS one · 2026Article
- Integrative single-cell and bulk transcriptomes analyses reveal T cell-related prognostic risk model and tumor immune microenvironment modulation in colorectal cancer.Translational cancer research · 2025Article
- Novel insights into immune-gut microbiota interactions in colorectal cancer: a Mendelian randomization study.Infectious agents and cancer · 2025Article
- Application of machine learning in the discovery of antimicrobial peptides: exploring their potential for ulcerative colitis therapy.eGastroenterology · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intestinal disease is a group of complex digestive system diseases imposing a significant burden globally. Identifying the risk factors and potential complications of intestinal disease is important for its prevention and treatment. However, traditional observational clinical studies are limited by confounding factors and reverse causation, making causal inference challenging. Mendelian randomisation (MR) method has been developed to effectively mitigate these constraints and assess the causal relationships. This review briefly introduces the MR method, summarises MR research on intestinal disease and delineates the prospective avenues for future research. Conventional risk factors, such as lifestyle behaviours (eg, physical activity, smoking and alcohol consumption), nutrients (eg, selenium), obesity markers (eg, body mass index and waist-to-hip ratio) and inflammatory biomarkers, have been validated in MR studies. Multiomics MR studies are becoming novel hotspots, which provide a theoretical foundation for the exploration of pathogenesis and the investigation of new drug targets. However, most of the recent studies are based on European individuals, and thus it is necessary to replicate the results in other ancestries. Moreover, triangulation integrating MR and other epidemiology methods is suggested as a validated paradigm for causal inference in future MR studies.
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.