ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2026
LiMA: Robust inference of molecular mediation from summary statistics.
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2026. 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.
- Genetically Predicted Gene Expression and Circulating Metabolites Associated with Cervical High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion: A Mendelian Randomization Study.International journal of women's 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the molecular mechanisms mediating the causal effects of epidemiological risk factors on complex traits can advance targeted disease interventions. Statistical mediation analysis facilitates this by disentangling direct and indirect causal effects. Current approaches to causal mediation leverage Mendelian randomization, using summary statistics from the exposure, mediator, and outcome studies that estimate the genetic effects of instruments. However, differences in study sample sizes (measurement errors) lead to substantial biases and poorly controlled type I error rates for these methods, which become especially pronounced when simultaneously estimating the mediation proportion of numerous mediators. To address these limitations, we introduce Likelihood-based Mediation Analysis (LiMA), which estimates molecular mediation more accurately and robustly by jointly modeling the variability in all estimates involved. Through extensive simulation studies and benchmarking, we demonstrate that our approach achieves several-fold lower bias and improved control for type I error than state-of-the-art methods. Applying our method to real data highlighted several plausible metabolites-such as glutamate and carnitine-as well as proteins mediating the causal effects of obesity-related risk factors on cardiometabolic outcomes. These findings underscore the potential of our framework to reveal promising molecular pathways underlying complex diseases. By accommodating the variability inherent to summary statistics of varying precision, LiMA enables robust mediation analyses across large sets of mediators.
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.