SynthesisClinical epigenetics2026
Epigenome-wide association study meta-analysis of wellbeing.
Synthesis in Clinical epigenetics, 2026. 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
35 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wellbeing is associated with both behavioral phenotypes as well as several key life outcomes, such as health, employment, and coping with stressful events. These phenotypes associated with wellbeing could be potential indicators of differential epigenetic patterns between individuals that differ in their levels of wellbeing. We performed the largest epigenome-wide (EWAS) meta-analysis of wellbeing to date by combining whole blood DNA methylation data (Illumina 450K array) from 13 cohorts from Europe, Australia, and the USA (N = 10,757 participants). After correcting for smoking and BMI, no epigenome-wide significant methylation sites were identified. We tested whether a weighted methylation score (MS) based on leave-one-cohort-out EWAS meta-analysis summary statistics predicted wellbeing in an independent cohort, and whether prediction was significant over and above the polygenic score (PGS) for wellbeing. The MS was associated with wellbeing (variance explained = 0.22%, p = 0.03) and was no longer significant after adding the polygenic score (PGS; variance explained = 0.43%, p = 0.0046, MS; variance explained = 0.07%, p = 0.2842). We further compared DNA methylation levels in 16 pairs of monozygotic twins discordant for wellbeing. These analyses revealed no significant within-pair DNA methylation differences at the top-sites from the meta-analysis or in MS. Our results suggest that larger EWAS meta-analyses with uniform phenotype assessment are required to identify methylation sites associated with wellbeing.
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.