Cited by 7,959Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock

The MR-Base platform supports systematic causal inference across the human phenome

Open access
Hemani, Gibran, Zheng, Jie, Elsworth, Benjamin, Wade, Kaitlin H, Haberland, Valeriia, Baird, Denis, Laurin, Charles, Burgess, Stephen +12 more·2018·eLife

Abstract

Results from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) can be used to infer causal relationships between phenotypes, using a strategy known as 2-sample Mendelian randomization (2SMR) and bypassing the need for individual-level data. However, 2SMR methods are evolving rapidly and GWAS results are often insufficiently curated, undermining efficient implementation of the approach. We therefore developed MR-Base ( http://www.mrbase.org ): a platform that integrates a curated database of complete GWAS results (no restrictions according to statistical significance) with an application programming interface, web app and R packages that automate 2SMR. The software includes several sensitivity analyses for assessing the impact of horizontal pleiotropy and other violations of assumptions. The database currently comprises 11 billion single nucleotide polymorphism-trait associations from 1673 GWAS and is updated on a regular basis. Integrating data with software ensures more rigorous application of hypothesis-driven analyses and allows millions of potential causal relationships to be efficiently evaluated in phenome-wide association studies.

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 · 10.7554/elife.34408

Cites

81 of 81 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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hemani, G., Zheng, J., Elsworth, B., Wade, K. H., Haberland, V., Baird, D., Laurin, C., Burgess, S., Bowden, J., Langdon, R., Tan, V. Y., Yarmolinsky, J., Shihab, H. A., Timpson, N. J., Evans, D. M., Relton, C., Martin, R. M., Davey Smith, G., Gaunt, T. R., & Haycock, P. C.
Affiliations
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Translational Research Institute (AU)
  • Medical Research Council (MRC) Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Corresponding author
  • Hemani, Gibran
  • Zheng, Jie
  • Gaunt, Tom R
  • Haycock, Philip C
Venue
eLife
Published
2018-05-30
Volume
7
ISSN
2050-084X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2805983714
Cited by
7,959
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 979 · 2025: 1671 · 2024: 2188 · 2023: 1227 · 2022: 763 · 2021: 534 · 2020: 346 · 2019: 196 · 2018: 44 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
176.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • eLife (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
  • Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome (208806/Z/17/Z)
  • Cancer Research UK (C18281/A19169, Population Research Postdoctoral Fellowship, C52724/A20138)
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Biogen
  • Medical Research Council (Methodology Research Fellowship, MR/N501906/1)
  • National Institute for Health Research (NIHR Bristol BRC)
  • Australian Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1125200, APP1137714)
  • Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation (2013/18/Relton)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Keywords
causal inference, single nucleotide polymorphisms, horizontal pleiotropy, sensitivity analysis, phenome-wide association study, R package, web application
MeSH terms
Coronary Disease, Humans, Cholesterol, LDL, Models, Genetic, Phenotype, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Databases, Genetic, Genome-Wide Association Study, 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