Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Peer-reviewed

A comparison of robust Mendelian randomization methods using summary data

Eric A. W. Slob, Stephen Burgess

Genetic Epidemiology · 2020

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

The number of Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses including large numbers of genetic variants is rapidly increasing. This is due to the proliferation of genome-wide association studies, and the desire to obtain more precise estimates of causal effects. Since it is unlikely that all genetic variants will be valid instrumental variables, several robust methods have been proposed. We compare nine robust methods for MR based on summary data that can be implemented using standard statistical software. Methods were compared in three ways: by reviewing their theoretical properties, in an extensive simulation study, and in an empirical example. In the simulation study, the best method, judged by mean squared error was the contamination mixture method. This method had well-controlled Type 1 error

Source type
Peer-reviewed study
DOI
10.1002/gepi.22295
Catalogue ID
SNmohdwjmi-9tb3em
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.