Cited by 135Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyCognitive Abilities and TestingIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies

Multivariable two-sample Mendelian randomization estimates of the effects of intelligence and education on health

Open access
Davies, Neil Martin, Hill, W David, Anderson, Emma L, Sanderson, Eleanor, Deary, Ian J, Davey Smith, George·2019·eLife

Abstract

Intelligence and education are predictive of better physical and mental health, socioeconomic position (SEP), and longevity. However, these associations are insufficient to prove that intelligence and/or education cause these outcomes. Intelligence and education are phenotypically and genetically correlated, which makes it difficult to elucidate causal relationships. We used univariate and multivariable Mendelian randomization to estimate the total and direct effects of intelligence and educational attainment on mental and physical health, measures of socioeconomic position, and longevity. Both intelligence and education had beneficial total effects. Higher intelligence had positive direct effects on income and alcohol consumption, and negative direct effects on moderate and vigorous physical activity. Higher educational attainment had positive direct effects on income, alcohol consumption, and vigorous physical activity, and negative direct effects on smoking, BMI and sedentary behaviour. If the Mendelian randomization assumptions hold, these findings suggest that both intelligence and education affect health.

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.43990

Cites

66 of 66 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?

  • Triangulation of evidence from multiple methodologies subject to different sources and directions of bias can help identify bias in MR studies, and alignment of results across methodologies can improve confidence in an initial causal interpretation.

    “Triangulation of evidence from multiple methodologies — using different methodologies that are subject to different sources and directions of potential bias — can help to identify bias in MR studies.6,7,155 Alignment of results across these different methodologies can improve confidence in an initial causal interpretation.”

    From Mendelian randomization (2022) · cites this paper as [155]

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
Davies, N. M., Hill, W. D., Anderson, E. L., Sanderson, E., Deary, I. J., & Davey Smith, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Corresponding author
Davies, Neil Martin
Venue
eLife
Published
2019-09-17
Volume
8
ISSN
2050-084X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2974720922
Cited by
135
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 4
FWCI
7.68
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)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/N000757/1)
  • Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12013/1, MC_UU_12013/9, MC_UU_00011/1, MR/K026992/1)
  • Age UK (Disconnected Mind Grant)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Keywords
intelligence, educational attainment, mental health, physical health, socioeconomic position, longevity, income, alcohol consumption, physical activity, smoking, body mass index, sedentary behavior, genetic correlation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Education, Female, United Kingdom, Health, Humans, Intelligence, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Biostatistics

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