ReviewInterdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases2025
Systematic Review of Mendelian Randomization Studies on
Review in Interdisciplinary perspectives on infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Materials and Methods: Eligible studies were identified from the two major biomedical literature databases, PubMed and Embase. After removing overlaps, we found 33 unique records published by July 10, 2024. Among those, 16 were qualified for full-text review as original research papers presenting MR analysis with HP infection as the primary exposure of interest. Results: Among the 16 studies, one was one-sample MR study and the rest 2-sample MR studies. All except one were conducted on individuals of European descent. Health outcomes studied include four metabolic conditions, four cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), five gastrointestinal conditions, and three other miscellaneous conditions. All used genome-wide association study (GWAS) data on HP serology to select instrumental variants, ranging from 1 to 84. Nine out of 16 studies concluded that HP had a causal association with the disease of their interest. However, not all papers fully examined whether MR key assumptions were met and there are inaccurate descriptions and misinterpretations in many papers. In addition, there are inconsistencies between studies, depending on the choice of exposure GWAS from which instrumental variants were chosen. Conclusions: Overall, published MR studies concerning HP infection and various health outcomes to date are limited in their quality/integrity. The results from HP eradication trials completed or in progress may help address the causality of some of the health outcomes with high incidence rates. In addition, MR studies in non-European populations with higher HP prevalence are warranted.
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.