Introduction to Mendelian randomization.
Annals of clinical epidemiology, ISSN: 2434-4338, Vol: 7, Issue: 1, Page: 27-37
2025
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Mendelian randomization (MR), i.e. instrumental variable analysis using genetic instruments, is an approach that incorporates population genetics to improve causal inference. Given that genetics are randomly allocated at conception, this resembles the randomization process in randomized controlled trials and hence is more resistant to unobserved confounding compared to conventional observational studies (e.g. cohort studies). The seminar paper briefly described the origin of MR and its underlying assumptions (relevance, independence, and exclusion restriction). This was followed by introducing one sample MR designs (in which instrument-exposure and instrument-outcome associations are derived from the same sample) and one sample MR design (in which instrument-exposure and instrument-outcome associations are derived from different samples). The seminar paper then summarized key aspects of MR studies, such as instrument selection, data sources for conducting MR studies, and statistical analyses. Variations of MR design were also introduced, such as how this design can inform the effect of drug targets (drug target MR). The STROBE-MR checklist and relevant MR guidelines were introduced. The seminar paper concluded by discussing the credibility crisis of MR studies.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know