A review of instrumental variable estimators for Mendelian randomization

被引:998
|
作者
Burgess, Stephen [1 ]
Small, Dylan S. [2 ]
Thompson, Simon G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cambridge, Dept Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Cambridge, England
[2] Univ Penn, Wharton Sch, Dept Stat, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
基金
英国惠康基金; 美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Instrumental variable; comparison of methods; causal inference; weak instruments; finite-sample bias; Mendelian randomization; MULTIPLE GENETIC-VARIANTS; WEAK INSTRUMENTS; CAUSAL INFERENCE; GENERALIZED-METHOD; SENSITIVITY-ANALYSIS; LOGISTIC-REGRESSION; SAMPLE PROPERTIES; CONFIDENCE SETS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; BIAS;
D O I
10.1177/0962280215597579
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Instrumental variable analysis is an approach for obtaining causal inferences on the effect of an exposure (risk factor) on an outcome from observational data. It has gained in popularity over the past decade with the use of genetic variants as instrumental variables, known as Mendelian randomization. An instrumental variable is associated with the exposure, but not associated with any confounder of the exposure-outcome association, nor is there any causal pathway from the instrumental variable to the outcome other than via the exposure. Under the assumption that a single instrumental variable or a set of instrumental variables for the exposure is available, the causal effect of the exposure on the outcome can be estimated. There are several methods available for instrumental variable estimation; we consider the ratio method, two-stage methods, likelihood-based methods, and semi-parametric methods. Techniques for obtaining statistical inferences and confidence intervals are presented. The statistical properties of estimates from these methods are compared, and practical advice is given about choosing a suitable analysis method. In particular, bias and coverage properties of estimators are considered, especially with weak instruments. Settings particularly relevant to Mendelian randomization are prioritized in the paper, notably the scenario of a continuous exposure and a continuous or binary outcome.
引用
收藏
页码:2333 / 2355
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Mendelian randomization and pleiotropy analysis
    Zhu, Xiaofeng
    QUANTITATIVE BIOLOGY, 2021, 9 (02) : 122 - 132
  • [42] On Mendelian randomization analysis of case-control study
    Zhang, Han
    Qin, Jing
    Berndt, Sonja I.
    Albanes, Demetrius
    Deng, Lu
    Gail, Mitchell H.
    Yu, Kai
    BIOMETRICS, 2020, 76 (02) : 380 - 391
  • [43] Mendelian randomization in health research: Using appropriate genetic variants and avoiding biased estimates
    Taylor, Amy E.
    Davies, Neil M.
    Ware, Jennifer J.
    VanderWeele, Tyler
    Smith, George Davey
    Munafo, Marcus R.
    ECONOMICS & HUMAN BIOLOGY, 2014, 13 : 99 - 106
  • [44] Comparison of variance estimators for meta-analysis of instrumental variable estimates
    Schmidt, A. F.
    Hingorani, A. D.
    Jefferis, B. J.
    White, J.
    Groenwold, R. H. H.
    Dudbridge, F.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 45 (06) : 1975 - 1986
  • [45] Occupational factors and low back pain: a Mendelian randomization study
    Wang, Zifeng
    Feng, Wubing
    Jin, Qi
    FRONTIERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH, 2023, 11
  • [46] Mendelian randomization mixed-scale treatment effect robust identification and estimation for causal inference
    Liu, Zhonghua
    Ye, Ting
    Sun, Baoluo
    Schooling, Mary
    Tchetgen, Eric Tchetgen
    BIOMETRICS, 2023, 79 (03) : 2208 - 2219
  • [47] Inflammatory factors and the risk of urolithiasis: a bidirectional Mendelian randomization study
    Huang, Kunyuan
    Peng, Zheng
    Zha, Cheng
    Li, Wei
    Deng, Guanyun
    Chen, Xiaolong
    Luo, Yuting
    Ji, Zhiqiang
    Wang, Qing
    Jiang, Kehua
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2024, 11
  • [48] Pleiotropy-robust Mendelian randomization
    van Kippersluis, Hans
    Rietveld, Cornelius A.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2018, 47 (04) : 1279 - 1288
  • [49] Survivor bias in Mendelian randomization analysis
    Vansteelandt, Stijn
    Dukes, Oliver
    Martinussen, Torben
    BIOSTATISTICS, 2018, 19 (04) : 426 - 443
  • [50] Missing Data Methods in Mendelian Randomization Studies With Multiple Instruments
    Burgess, Stephen
    Seaman, Shaun
    Lawlor, Debbie A.
    Casas, Juan P.
    Thompson, Simon G.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 174 (09) : 1069 - 1076