Mendelian Randomisation: A Tool for Assessing Causality in Observational Epidemiology

Methods in Molecular Biology

Volumn 713, Issue , 2011, Pages 153-166

  Sheehan, Nuala A ^a   Meng, Sha ^a   Didelez, Vanessa ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Causal inference; Confounding; Instrumental variable

Indexed keywords

FIBRINOGEN; HOMOCYSTEINE;

ARTICLE; BLOOD; BLOOD PRESSURE; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DRINKING BEHAVIOR; EPIDEMIOLOGY; HUMAN; MENDELIAN RANDOMIZATION ANALYSIS; METABOLISM; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR EPIDEMIOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; STROKE;

ALCOHOL DRINKING; BLOOD PRESSURE; CAUSALITY; CORONARY DISEASE; FIBRINOGEN; HOMOCYSTEINE; HUMANS; MENDELIAN RANDOMIZATION ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR EPIDEMIOLOGY; STROKE;

EID: 79952577087     PISSN: 10643745     EISSN: 19406029     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-60327-416-6_12     Document Type: Chapter

References (37)

1. D.A. Lawlor, R.M. Harbord, J.A.C. Sterne, N. Timpson, and G.D. Smith. Mendelian randomization: using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology. Statistics in Medicine, 27:1133–1328, 2008.
2. R. Doll, R. Peto, J. Boreham, and I. Sutherland. Mortality from cancer in relation to smoking: 50 years observations on British doctors. British Journal of Cancer, 92:426– 429, 2005.
3. MRC Vitamin Study Research Group. Prevention of neural tube defects: results of the Medical Research Council vitamin study. Lancet, 338:131–137, 1991.
4. T.O. Scholl and W.G. Johnson. Folic acid: influence on the outcome of pregnancy. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 71 (Suppl.):12955–13035, 2000.
5. W.C. Willett. Vitamin A and lung cancer. Nutritional Review, 48:201–211, 1990.
6. R. Peto, R. Doll, J.D. Buckley, and M.B. Sporn. Can dietary beta-carotene materially reduce human cancer rates? Nature, 290:201– 208, 1981.
7. Alpha-Tocopherol, Beta Carotene Cancer Prevention Study Group. The effect of vitamin E and beta carotene on the incidence of lung cancer and other cancers in male smokers. New England Journal of Medicine, 330:1029–1035, 1994.
8. G.D. Smith, S. Ebrahim, S. Lewis, A.L. Hansell, L.J. Palmer, and P.R. Burton. Genetic epidemiology and public health: hope, hype, and future prospects. Lancet, 366:1484– 1498, 2005.
9. A. Tatsioni, N.G. Bonitis, and J.P.A. Ioannidis. Persistence of contradicted claims in the literature. Journal of the American Medical Association, 298:2517–2526, 2007.
10. G.D. Smith and S. Ebrahim. Mendelian randomization: can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease? International Journal of Epidemiology, 32:1–22, 2003.
11. M.B. Katan. Commentary: Mendelian randomization, 18 years on. International Journal of Epidemiology, 33:10–11, 2004.
12. N.A. Sheehan, V. Didelez, P.R. Burton, and M.D. Tobin. Mendelian randomisation and causal inference in observational epidemiology. PLoS Medicine, 5:e177, 2008.
13. R.J. Bowden and D.A. Turkington. Instrumental Variables. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984.
14. S. Greenland. An introduction to instrumental variables for epidemiologists. International Journal of Epidemiology, 29:722–729, 2000.
15. M.A. Hernán and J.M. Robins. Instruments for causal inference: an epidemiologist’s dream? Epidemiology, 17:360–372, 2006.
16. V. Didelez and N.A. Sheehan. Mendelian randomisation as an instrumental variable approach to causal inference. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 16:309–330, 2007.
17. J. Pearl. Causal diagrams for empirical research. Biometrika, 82:669–710, 1995.
18. S.L. Lauritzen. Causal inference from graphical models. In O.E. Barndorff-Nielsen, D.R. Cox, and C. Kluppelberg, editors, Complex Stochastic Systems, Chapter 2, 63–107. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton, 2000.
19. A.P. Dawid. Influence diagrams for causal modelling and inference. International Statistical Review, 70:161–189, 2002.
20. A.P. Dawid. Causal inference using influence diagrams: the problem of partial compliance. In P.J. Green, N.L. Hjort, and S. Richardson, editors, Highly Structured Stochastic Systems, 45–81. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003.
21. D.B. Rubin. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66:688–701, 1974.
22. J. Pearl. Causality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.
23. M.A. Hernán. A definition of causal effect for epidemiologic research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 58:265–271, 2004.
24. V. Didelez and N.A. Sheehan. Mendelian randomisation: why epidemiology needs a formal language for causality. In F. Russo and J. Williamson, editors, Causality and Probability in the Sciences, volume 5, Texts in Philosophy, 263–292. London College Publications, London, 2007.
25. J.M. Robins, T.J. VanderWeele, and T.S. Richardson. Comment on: Causal effects in the presence of non compliance: a latent variable interpretation. Metron, 64:288–298, 2006.
26. S. Geneletti and A.P. Dawid. The effect of treatment on the treated: a decision theoretic perspective. In P. McKay Illari, F. Russo and J. Williamson, editors, Causality in the Sciences,Oxford University Press, 2010.
27. V. Didelez, S. Meng, and N.A. Sheehan. Assumptions of IV methods for observational epidemiology. Statistical Science, 25: 22-40, 2010.
28. G.D. Smith, D.A. Lawlor, R. Harbord, N. Timpson, I. Day, and S. Ebrahim. Clustered environments and randomized genes: a fundamental distinction between conventional and genetic epidemiology. PLoS Medicine, 4:e352, 2007.
29. J.P. Casas, L.E. Bautista, L. Smeeth, P. Sharma, and A.D. Hingorani. Homocysteine and stroke: evidence on a causal link from Mendelian randomisation. Lancet, 365:224– 232, 2005.
30. G.D. Smith, R. Harbord, J. Milton, S. Ebrahim, and J. Sterne. Does elevated plasma fibrinogen increase the risk of coronary heart disease? Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology, 25:2228–2233, 2005.
31. L. Chen, G.D. Smith, R. Harbord, and S.J. Lewis. Alcohol intake and blood pressure: a systematic review implementing a Mendelian randomization approach. PLoS Medicine, 5:e52, 2008.
32. A.A. Balke and J. Pearl. Counterfactual probabilities: computational methods, bounds and applications. In R.L. Mantaras and D. Poole, editors, Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Inteligence, 46–54, 1994.
33. N.J. Timpson, D.A. Lawlor, R.M. Harbord, T.R. Gaunt, I.N.M. Day, L.J. Palmer, A.T. Hattersley, S. Ebrahim, G.D.O. Lowe, A. Rumpley, and G.D. Smith. C-reactive protein and its role in metabolic syndrome: a Mendelian randomisation study. Lancet, 366:1954–1959, 2005.
34. J.M. Robins. Correcting for non-compliance in randomized trials using structural nested mean models. Communications in Statistics, 23:2379–2412, 1994.
35. S. Vansteelandt and E. Goetghebeur. Causal inference with generalized structural mean models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 65:817–835, 2003.
36. P. Clarke and F. Windmeijer. Instrumental variable estimators for binary outcomes. Working Paper 10/239, Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, 2010.
37. D. Nitsch, M. Molokhia, L. Smeeth, B.L. DeStavola, J.C. Whittaker, and D.A. Leon. Limits to causal inference based on Mendelian randomization: a comparison with randomised controlled trials. American Journal of Epidemiology, 163:397–403, 2006.