Cited by 134Nutrition, Genetics, and DiseaseGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetics and Physical Performance

Use of genetic markers and gene-diet interactions for interrogating population-level causal influences of diet on health

Open access
Davey Smith, George·2011·Genes & Nutrition

Abstract

Differences in diet appear to contribute substantially to the burden of disease in populations, and therefore changes in diet could lead to major improvements in public health. This is predicated on the reliable identification of causal effects of nutrition on health, and unfortunately nutritional epidemiology has deficiencies in terms of identifying these. This is reflected in the many cases where observational studies have suggested that a nutritional factor is protective against disease, and randomized controlled trials have failed to verify this. The use of genetic variants as proxy measures of nutritional exposure-an application of the Mendelian randomization principle-can contribute to strengthening causal inference in this field. Genetic variants are not subject to bias due to reverse causation (disease processes influencing exposure, rather than vice versa) or recall bias, and if obvious precautions are applied are not influenced by confounding or attenuation by errors. This is illustrated in the case of epidemiological studies of alcohol intake and various health outcomes, through the use of genetic variants related to alcohol metabolism (in ALDH2 and ADH1B). Examples from other areas of nutritional epidemiology and of the informative nature of gene-environment interactions interpreted within the Mendelian randomization framework are presented, and the potential limitations of the approach addressed.

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/s12263-010-0181-y

Cites

116 of 116 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davey Smith, G.
Venue
Genes & Nutrition
Published
2010-09-10
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
27-43
ISSN
  • 1555-8932 (ISSN-L)
  • 1865-3499
OpenAlex
W2058341652
Cited by
134
References
116
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 17
FWCI
6.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genes & Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Bristol (G0600705)
  • Medical Research Council (G0600705)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Nutrition, Genetics, and Disease
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Physical Performance
Keywords
Mendelian randomization, gene-diet interaction, reverse causality, confounding, alcohol consumption, alcohol metabolism, ALDH2, ADH1B, nutritional epidemiology, gene-environment interaction

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