Cited by 4,571Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Interpreting findings from Mendelian randomization using the MR-Egger method.

Open access
Burgess, Stephen, Thompson, Simon G.·2017·European Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

Mendelian randomization-Egger (MR-Egger) is an analysis method for Mendelian randomization using summarized genetic data. MR-Egger consists of three parts: (1) a test for directional pleiotropy, (2) a test for a causal effect, and (3) an estimate of the causal effect. While conventional analysis methods for Mendelian randomization assume that all genetic variants satisfy the instrumental variable assumptions, the MR-Egger method is able to assess whether genetic variants have pleiotropic effects on the outcome that differ on average from zero (directional pleiotropy), as well as to provide a consistent estimate of the causal effect, under a weaker assumption-the InSIDE (INstrument Strength Independent of Direct Effect) assumption. In this paper, we provide a critical assessment of the MR-Egger method with regard to its implementation and interpretation. While the MR-Egger method is a worthwhile sensitivity analysis for detecting violations of the instrumental variable assumptions, there are several reasons why causal estimates from the MR-Egger method may be biased and have inflated Type 1 error rates in practice, including violations of the InSIDE assumption and the influence of outlying variants. The issues raised in this paper have potentially serious consequences for causal inferences from the MR-Egger approach. We give examples of scenarios in which the estimates from conventional Mendelian randomization methods and MR-Egger differ, and discuss how to interpret findings in such cases.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10654-017-0255-x

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Genetic variants in the IL6R gene region are associated with increased circulating levels of interleukin-6, but they decrease interleukin-6 signalling, leading to opposite directions of association with disease outcomes to those expected based on serum interleukin-6 measurements.

    “As an example, although genetic variants in the IL6R gene region are associated with increased circulating levels of interleukin-6, they in fact decrease interleukin-6 signalling, leading to opposite directions of association with disease outcomes to those expected based on serum interleukin-6 measurements 65 .”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [40]Huber PJ Robust statistics 2011 Berlin Springer

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Burgess, S., & Thompson, S. G.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Burgess, Stephen
Venue
European Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2017-05
Volume
32
Issue
5
Pages
377-389
ISSN
  • 0393-2990 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7284
OpenAlex
W2614566443
Cited by
4,571
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 430 · 2025: 1101 · 2024: 1621 · 2023: 693 · 2022: 312 · 2021: 196 · 2020: 119 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 5
FWCI
39.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust/Royal Society (204623/Z/16/Z)
  • British Heart Foundation (CH/12/2/29428)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
MR-Egger, Mendelian randomization, causal effect estimation, type I error, sensitivity analysis
MeSH terms
Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Models, Biological, Random Allocation, Risk Factors, Genetic Variation, Mendelian Randomization Analysis, Genetic Pleiotropy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review