scispace - formally typeset
G

George Davey Smith

Researcher at University of Bristol

Publications -  2646
Citations -  294406

George Davey Smith is an academic researcher from University of Bristol. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Mendelian randomization. The author has an hindex of 224, co-authored 2540 publications receiving 248373 citations. Previous affiliations of George Davey Smith include Keele University & Western Infirmary.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

HHS Public Access

Martine Hoogman, +247 more
Journal ArticleDOI

Assessing the suitability of summary data for two-sample Mendelian randomization analyses using MR-Egger regression: the role of the I2 statistic

TL;DR: The proposed approach for a two-sample summary data MR analysis to estimate the causal effect of low-density lipoprotein on heart disease risk is demonstrated and care must be taken to assess the NOME assumption via the IGX2 statistic before implementing standard MR-Egger regression in the two- sample summary data context.
Journal ArticleDOI

Risk thresholds for alcohol consumption: combined analysis of individual-participant data for 599 912 current drinkers in 83 prospective studies

Angela M. Wood, +132 more
- 14 Apr 2018 - 
TL;DR: Current drinkers of alcohol in high-income countries, the threshold for lowest risk of all-cause mortality was about 100 g/week, and data support limits for alcohol consumption that are lower than those recommended in most current guidelines.
Journal ArticleDOI

A framework for the investigation of pleiotropy in two-sample summary data Mendelian randomization

TL;DR: How established methods of meta‐regression and random effects modelling from mainstream meta‐analysis are being adapted to perform MR analyses are clarified, and the ability of two popular random effects models to provide robustness to pleiotropy under the IVW approach is investigated.
Journal ArticleDOI

Triangulation in aetiological epidemiology.

TL;DR: A minimum set of criteria for use in triangulation in aetiological epidemiology is proposed, the key sources of bias of several approaches are summarized and how these might be integrated within a triangulated framework are described.