scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

George Davey Smith

Other affiliations: Keele University, Western Infirmary, Health Science University  ...read more
Bio: 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
TL;DR: Vitamin B12 and (in cohort studies) folate were associated with increased prostate cancer risk and further research is needed to determine whether these are causal associations.
Abstract: Background: Disturbed folate metabolism is associated with an increased risk of some cancers. Our objective was to determine whether blood levels of folate, vitamin B12, and related metabolites were associated with prostate cancer risk. Methods: Matched case-control study nested within the U.K. population–based Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) study of prostate-specific antigen–detected prostate cancer in men ages 50 to 69 years. Plasma concentrations of folate, B12 (cobalamin), holo-haptocorrin, holo-transcobalamin total transcobalamin, and total homocysteine (tHcy) were measured in 1,461 cases and 1,507 controls. ProtecT study estimates for associations of folate, B12, and tHcy with prostate cancer risk were included in a meta-analysis, based on a systematic review. Results: In the ProtecT study, increased B12 and holo-haptocorrin concentrations showed positive associations with prostate cancer risk [highest versus lowest quartile of B12 odds ratio (OR) = 1.17 (95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.43); Ptrend = 0.06; highest versus lowest quartile of holo-haptocorrin OR = 1.27 (1.04-1.56); Ptrend = 0.01]; folate, holo-transcobalamin, and tHcy were not associated with prostate cancer risk. In the meta-analysis, circulating B12 levels were associated with an increased prostate cancer risk [pooled OR = 1.10 (1.01-1.19) per 100 pmol/L increase in B12; P = 0.002]; the pooled OR for the association of folate with prostate cancer was positive [OR = 1.11 (0.96-1.28) per 10 nmol/L; P = 0.2) and conventionally statistically significant if ProtecT (the only case-control study) was excluded [OR = 1.18 (1.00-1.40) per 10 nmol/L; P = 0.02]. Conclusion: Vitamin B12 and (in cohort studies) folate were associated with increased prostate cancer risk. Impact: Given current controversies over mandatory fortification, further research is needed to determine whether these are causal associations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(6); 1632–42. ©2010 AACR.

133 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Examination of changes in psychosocial work characteristics (job strain model) and health-related behaviors as potential explanations of the job insecurity-health relationship in a longitudinal cohort of white-collar British civil servants found little in adverse changes in these factors.
Abstract: This article describes 2 studies that examined changes in psychosocial work characteristics (job strain model) and health-related behaviors as potential explanations of the job insecurity-health relationship in a longitudinal cohort of white-collar British civil servants. Job insecurity arising from anticipation of change was associated with a modest increase in self-reported morbidity, whereas chronic job insecurity was associated with some adverse physiological changes. Anticipation of change and chronic job insecurity were associated with adverse changes in other psychosocial work characteristics, but few changes were significant and consistent across both exposure groups. Changes in health-related behaviors associated with either exposure were slight. Apart from a minor role for social support at work in both sexes and a modest role for job demands in women, adverse changes in these factors explain little of the job insecurity-health relationship.

132 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Birth weight does not predict adiposity on the basis of weight gain in childhood, and it remains unclear whether early childhood is the optimum period in the life course for the primary prevention of adult adiposity.

132 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
H. Rob Taal1, Beate St Pourcain2, Elisabeth Thiering, Shikta Das3  +227 moreInstitutions (60)
TL;DR: This article performed a meta-analysis of seven genome-wide association studies (GWAS) (N = 10,768 individuals of European ancestry enrolled in pregnancy and/or birth cohorts) and followed up three lead signals in six replication studies (combined N = 19,089).
Abstract: To identify genetic variants associated with head circumference in infancy, we performed a meta-analysis of seven genome-wide association studies (GWAS) (N = 10,768 individuals of European ancestry enrolled in pregnancy and/or birth cohorts) and followed up three lead signals in six replication studies (combined N = 19,089). rs7980687 on chromosome 12q24 (P = 8.1 × 10(-9)) and rs1042725 on chromosome 12q15 (P = 2.8 × 10(-10)) were robustly associated with head circumference in infancy. Although these loci have previously been associated with adult height, their effects on infant head circumference were largely independent of height (P = 3.8 × 10(-7) for rs7980687 and P = 1.3 × 10(-7) for rs1042725 after adjustment for infant height). A third signal, rs11655470 on chromosome 17q21, showed suggestive evidence of association with head circumference (P = 3.9 × 10(-6)). SNPs correlated to the 17q21 signal have shown genome-wide association with adult intracranial volume, Parkinson's disease and other neurodegenerative diseases, indicating that a common genetic variant in this region might link early brain growth with neurological disease in later life.

132 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors conducted genome-wide association studies of three phenotypes: subjective well-being (n = 298,420), depressive symptoms (n= 161,460), and neuroticism(n = 170,911).
Abstract: Very few genetic variants have been associated with depression and neuroticism, likely because of limitations on sample size in previous studies. Subjective well-being, a phenotype that is genetically correlated with both of these traits, has not yet been studied with genome-wide data. We conducted genome-wide association studies of three phenotypes: subjective well-being (n = 298,420), depressive symptoms (n = 161,460), and neuroticism (n = 170,911). We identify 3 variants associated with subjective well-being, 2 variants associated with depressive symptoms, and 11 variants associated with neuroticism, including 2 inversion polymorphisms. The two loci associated with depressive symptoms replicate in an independent depression sample. Joint analyses that exploit the high genetic correlations between the phenotypes (\textbarρ^\textbar ? 0.8) strengthen the overall credibility of the findings and allow us to identify additional variants. Across our phenotypes, loci regulating expression in central nervous system and adrenal or pancreas tissues are strongly enriched for association.

132 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
04 Sep 2003-BMJ
TL;DR: A new quantity is developed, I 2, which the authors believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis, which is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta- analysis.
Abstract: Cochrane Reviews have recently started including the quantity I 2 to help readers assess the consistency of the results of studies in meta-analyses. What does this new quantity mean, and why is assessment of heterogeneity so important to clinical practice? Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can provide convincing and reliable evidence relevant to many aspects of medicine and health care.1 Their value is especially clear when the results of the studies they include show clinically important effects of similar magnitude. However, the conclusions are less clear when the included studies have differing results. In an attempt to establish whether studies are consistent, reports of meta-analyses commonly present a statistical test of heterogeneity. The test seeks to determine whether there are genuine differences underlying the results of the studies (heterogeneity), or whether the variation in findings is compatible with chance alone (homogeneity). However, the test is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta-analysis. We have developed a new quantity, I 2, which we believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis. Assessment of the consistency of effects across studies is an essential part of meta-analysis. Unless we know how consistent the results of studies are, we cannot determine the generalisability of the findings of the meta-analysis. Indeed, several hierarchical systems for grading evidence state that the results of studies must be consistent or homogeneous to obtain the highest grading.2–4 Tests for heterogeneity are commonly used to decide on methods for combining studies and for concluding consistency or inconsistency of findings.5 6 But what does the test achieve in practice, and how should the resulting P values be interpreted? A test for heterogeneity examines the null hypothesis that all studies are evaluating the same effect. The usual test statistic …

45,105 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
13 Sep 1997-BMJ
TL;DR: Funnel plots, plots of the trials' effect estimates against sample size, are skewed and asymmetrical in the presence of publication bias and other biases Funnel plot asymmetry, measured by regression analysis, predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared with single large trials.
Abstract: Objective: Funnel plots (plots of effect estimates against sample size) may be useful to detect bias in meta-analyses that were later contradicted by large trials. We examined whether a simple test of asymmetry of funnel plots predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared to large trials, and we assessed the prevalence of bias in published meta-analyses. Design: Medline search to identify pairs consisting of a meta-analysis and a single large trial (concordance of results was assumed if effects were in the same direction and the meta-analytic estimate was within 30% of the trial); analysis of funnel plots from 37 meta-analyses identified from a hand search of four leading general medicine journals 1993-6 and 38 meta-analyses from the second 1996 issue of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews . Main outcome measure: Degree of funnel plot asymmetry as measured by the intercept from regression of standard normal deviates against precision. Results: In the eight pairs of meta-analysis and large trial that were identified (five from cardiovascular medicine, one from diabetic medicine, one from geriatric medicine, one from perinatal medicine) there were four concordant and four discordant pairs. In all cases discordance was due to meta-analyses showing larger effects. Funnel plot asymmetry was present in three out of four discordant pairs but in none of concordant pairs. In 14 (38%) journal meta-analyses and 5 (13%) Cochrane reviews, funnel plot asymmetry indicated that there was bias. Conclusions: A simple analysis of funnel plots provides a useful test for the likely presence of bias in meta-analyses, but as the capacity to detect bias will be limited when meta-analyses are based on a limited number of small trials the results from such analyses should be treated with considerable caution. Key messages Systematic reviews of randomised trials are the best strategy for appraising evidence; however, the findings of some meta-analyses were later contradicted by large trials Funnel plots, plots of the trials9 effect estimates against sample size, are skewed and asymmetrical in the presence of publication bias and other biases Funnel plot asymmetry, measured by regression analysis, predicts discordance of results when meta-analyses are compared with single large trials Funnel plot asymmetry was found in 38% of meta-analyses published in leading general medicine journals and in 13% of reviews from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Critical examination of systematic reviews for publication and related biases should be considered a routine procedure

37,989 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this review the usual methods applied in systematic reviews and meta-analyses are outlined, and the most common procedures for combining studies with binary outcomes are described, illustrating how they can be done using Stata commands.

31,656 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An Explanation and Elaboration of the PRISMA Statement is presented and updated guidelines for the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses are presented.
Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analysis) Statement—a reporting guideline published in 1999—there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realizing these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

25,711 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
18 Oct 2011-BMJ
TL;DR: The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate.
Abstract: Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate

22,227 citations