Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40527839›Full record

ArticleMedicine2025

Causal effects of office-associated behaviors on spinal stenosis: Two-sample Mendelian randomization study.

Sihan Chen, Zhengkai Shao, Hua Zhan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sihan ChenNingbo Taikang Hospital, Ningbo, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2411-3256
Zhengkai Shao
Hua Zhan

Funding

This paper is financially supported by Taikang Health Investment Youth Medical Research Start-up Fund 2022018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mendelian randomized studies can look for risk factors for disease. Spinal stenosis refers to a class of diseases that cause the shortening of the diameter of the spinal canal for various reasons, compressing the dural sac, spinal cord or nerve roots, resulting in a series of neurological dysfunctions such as pain, numbness, limb weakness, claudication, and urine and bowel disorders. The incidence of the disease is gradually increasing. Many office workers suffer from spinal diseases, and this study focused on the relationship between office-related behavioral features and spinal stenosis through Mendelian randomized analysis. In this study, we focused on direct Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis of office-related behavioral characteristics and spinal stenosis. The raw data for this study were taken from the Integrative Epidemiology Unit OpenGWAS project. Exposures: body mass index (BMI), nap during day, seated height, coffee, and Avoided activities or situations because of previous stressful experience in past month. Outcome factor: Spinal stenosis. Data filtering: Filter the results according to P value < 5e-08. After removing the linkage imbalance single nucleotide polymorphisms and removing the weak instrumental variable (filtering according to the F value > 10), then removing the confounding factors (P value = 1e-05, r2 = 0.8), and finally obtaining reliable Mendelian random analysis results. The results of two-sample MR analysis showed that sitting height was a protective factor for spinal stenosis, while BMI were risk factors for spinal stenosis. Through a two-sample MR analysis, we considered sitting height to be a protective factor for spinal stenosis, while BMI was a risk factor for spinal stenosis.

Indexed as

Spinal StenosisBody Mass IndexFemaleHumansMaleMendelian Randomization AnalysisPolymorphism, Single NucleotideRisk FactorsSitting PositionGWASMendelian randomizationoffice behaviorspinal stenosis

Identifiers

PMID40527839
PMCPMC12173338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.