scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Using Mendelian Randomization: The STROBE-MR Statement

TLDR
The STROBE-MR Statement as discussed by the authors provides guidelines for reporting Mendelian Randomization (MR) studies and provides a set of guidelines to improve the reporting of these studies.
Abstract
Importance Mendelian randomization (MR) studies use genetic variation associated with modifiable exposures to assess their possible causal relationship with outcomes and aim to reduce potential bias from confounding and reverse causation. Objective To develop the STROBE-MR Statement as a stand-alone extension to the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guideline for the reporting of MR studies. Design, Setting, and Participants The development of the STROBE-MR Statement followed the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) framework guidance and used the STROBE Statement as a starting point to draft a checklist tailored to MR studies. The project was initiated in 2018 by reviewing the literature on the reporting of instrumental variable and MR studies. A group of 17 experts, including MR methodologists, MR study design users, developers of previous reporting guidelines, and journal editors, participated in a workshop in May 2019 to define the scope of the Statement and draft the checklist. The draft checklist was published as a preprint in July 2019 and discussed on the preprint platform, in social media, and at the 4th Mendelian Randomization Conference. The checklist was then revised based on comments, further refined through 2020, and finalized in July 2021. Findings The STROBE-MR checklist is organized into 6 sections (Title and Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Other Information) and includes 20 main items and 30 subitems. It covers both 1-sample and 2-sample MR studies that assess 1 or multiple exposures and outcomes, and addresses MR studies that follow a genome-wide association study and are reported in the same article. The checklist asks authors to justify why MR is a helpful method to address the study question and state prespecified causal hypotheses. The measurement, quality, and selection of genetic variants must be described and attempts to assess validity of MR-specific assumptions should be well reported. An item on data sharing includes reporting when the data and statistical code required to replicate the analyses can be accessed. Conclusions and Relevance STROBE-MR provides guidelines for reporting MR studies. Improved reporting of these studies could facilitate their evaluation by editors, peer reviewers, researchers, clinicians, and other readers, and enhance the interpretation of their results.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Mendelian randomization

TL;DR: Mendelian randomization (MR) as discussed by the authors is a technique for using genetic variation to examine the causal effect of a modifiable exposure on an outcome such as disease status.
Journal ArticleDOI

Lifestyle and metabolic factors for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Mendelian randomization study

TL;DR: The risk factors for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) have not been clearly identified as mentioned in this paper , but independent genetic variants strongly associated with 5 lifestyle and 9 metabolic factors were selected as instrumental variables from corresponding genome-wide association studies (GWASs).
Journal ArticleDOI

Causal effects of gut microbiota on diabetic retinopathy: A Mendelian randomization study

TL;DR: There was a potential causal relationship between some GM taxa and DR, which highlights the association of the “gut-retina” axis and offered new insights into the GM-mediated mechanism of DR.
Journal ArticleDOI

Identifying factors contributing to increased susceptibility to COVID-19 risk: a systematic review of Mendelian randomization studies

TL;DR: Modifiable factors for intervention (e.g. smoking, obesity and inflammatory factors) and proteomic signatures that could help identify drugs for treating COVID-19 are summarized.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

TL;DR: In this article, a group of methodologists, researchers, and journal editors sets out guidelines to improve reports of observational studies, which hampers assessment and makes it less useful.
Journal ArticleDOI

‘Mendelian randomization’: can genetic epidemiology contribute to understanding environmental determinants of disease?

TL;DR: Mendelian randomization provides new opportunities to test causality and demonstrates how investment in the human genome project may contribute to understanding and preventing the adverse effects on human health of modifiable exposures.
Journal ArticleDOI

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration

TL;DR: A checklist of items that should be addressed in Reports of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement, a general reporting recommendations for descriptive observational studies and studies that investigate associations between exposures and health outcomes is developed.
Journal ArticleDOI

Mendelian randomization: using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology.

TL;DR: The use of germline genetic variants that proxy for environmentally modifiable exposures as instruments for these exposures is one form of IV analysis that can be implemented within observational epidemiological studies and can be considered as analogous to randomized controlled trials.
Journal ArticleDOI

Reading Mendelian randomisation studies: a guide, glossary, and checklist for clinicians

TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide explanations of the information typically reported in Mendelian randomisation studies that can be used to assess the plausibility of these assumptions and guidance on how to interpret findings from such studies in the context of other sources of evidence.
Related Papers (5)

The STROCSS statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery

Riaz Agha, +48 more