孟德尔随机化和多效性分析。

Pub Date : 2021-07-13 Epub Date: 2020-10-21 DOI:10.1007/s40484-020-0216-3
Xiaofeng Zhu
{"title":"孟德尔随机化和多效性分析。","authors":"Xiaofeng Zhu","doi":"10.1007/s40484-020-0216-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis has become popular in inferring and estimating the causality of an exposure on an outcome due to the success of genome wide association studies. Many statistical approaches have been developed and each of these methods require specific assumptions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this article, we review the pros and cons of these methods. We use an example of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol on coronary artery disease to illuminate the challenges in Mendelian randomization investigation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current available MR approaches allow us to study causality among risk factors and outcomes. However, novel approaches are desirable for overcoming multiple source confounding of risk factors and an outcome in MR analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":74626,"journal":{"name":"","volume":"9 2","pages":"122-132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8356909/pdf/nihms-1674208.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mendelian randomization and pleiotropy analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaofeng Zhu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40484-020-0216-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis has become popular in inferring and estimating the causality of an exposure on an outcome due to the success of genome wide association studies. Many statistical approaches have been developed and each of these methods require specific assumptions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this article, we review the pros and cons of these methods. We use an example of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol on coronary artery disease to illuminate the challenges in Mendelian randomization investigation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current available MR approaches allow us to study causality among risk factors and outcomes. However, novel approaches are desirable for overcoming multiple source confounding of risk factors and an outcome in MR analysis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74626,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":\"9 2\",\"pages\":\"122-132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8356909/pdf/nihms-1674208.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40484-020-0216-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/10/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40484-020-0216-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:由于全基因组关联研究的成功,孟德尔随机化(MR)分析已成为推断和估计暴露对结果的因果关系的常用方法。目前已开发出许多统计方法,每种方法都需要特定的假设条件:在本文中,我们回顾了这些方法的优缺点。我们以高密度脂蛋白胆固醇对冠状动脉疾病的影响为例,阐明了孟德尔随机调查所面临的挑战:结论:目前可用的 MR 方法允许我们研究风险因素和结果之间的因果关系。结论:目前可用的磁共振方法允许我们研究风险因素和结果之间的因果关系,但是,在磁共振分析中,我们需要新的方法来克服风险因素和结果之间的多源混杂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mendelian randomization and pleiotropy analysis.

Background: Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis has become popular in inferring and estimating the causality of an exposure on an outcome due to the success of genome wide association studies. Many statistical approaches have been developed and each of these methods require specific assumptions.

Results: In this article, we review the pros and cons of these methods. We use an example of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol on coronary artery disease to illuminate the challenges in Mendelian randomization investigation.

Conclusion: The current available MR approaches allow us to study causality among risk factors and outcomes. However, novel approaches are desirable for overcoming multiple source confounding of risk factors and an outcome in MR analysis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1