ArticleMedicine2026
Causal relationships between salt intake and gastric cancer: A two-sample Mendelian randomization study.
Article in Medicine, 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.
- Rethinking gastric carcinogenesis: a multiscale ecological model of risk beyondFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The link between salt intake and the risk of gastric cancer remains uncertain, and a causal relationship has not been established. Therefore, clarifying the causal effect of salt intake on the risk of gastric cancer using reliable causal inference methods is necessary. The aim of this study was to assess the causal association between salt intake and cancer by integrating summary-level genome-wide association study (GWAS) data. Two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses were performed using summary statistics from a GWAS. Inverse-variance weighted (IVW) regression, Mendelian randomization-Egger (MR-Egger) regression, and weighted median analyses were used to evaluate the causal relationship between salt intake and gastric cancer. Moreover, Mendelian Randomization Pleiotropy RESidual Sum of Squares and Outliers and MR-Egger analyses were used to evaluate the level of multipotency, and "leave-one-out" sensitivity analysis was assessed. The IVW method estimate indicated that salt intake was not correlated with gastric cancer incidence. The IVW (β = 0.1008, standard error [SE] = 0.1510, odds ratio [OR] = 1.1061, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.48, P = .5042), MR-Egger regression (β = 0.059, SE = 0.5318, OR = 1.0612, 95% CI, 0.37-3.01, P = .9111), and weighted median (β = 0.2639, SE = 0.2298, OR = 1.3020, 95% CI, 0.82-2.04, P = .2508) analyses revealed no causal relationship between salt intake and gastric cancer risk (P > .05). In addition, the funnel plot and MR-Egger analysis (P = .6694 > .05) did not indicate horizontal pleiotropy or heterogeneity. GWAS data from public databases were used in this study, and the causal relationship between salt intake and gastric cancer risk was analyzed via a two-sample MR method. The results revealed no genetic causal relationship between salt intake and gastric cancer.
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.