ArticleRenal failure2025
A practical guide for nephrologist peer reviewers: understanding and appraising Mendelian randomization studies.
Article in Renal failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Male reproductive surgeries and long-term kidney outcomes: a Mendelian randomization and meta-analysis of UK Biobank and FinnGen.Renal failure · 2026Pooled it
- Causal insights into major risk factors for diabetic kidney disease: a comprehensive meta-analysis and Mendelian randomization study.Renal failure · 2025Pooled it
- Proteomic Mendelian randomization and machine learning reveal causal plasma biomarkers in cardiorenal comorbidity.Renal failure · 2026Article
- Kidney function decline and kidney stone risk: cohort and Mendelian randomization analyses.Renal failure · 2026Article
- Mendelian randomization evidence for a causal link between Epstein-Barr virus antibody levels and head and neck cancer risk.Medicine · 2026Article
- Effect of a Combination of Prebiotic Supplements Based on Fucus and Kelp on the Gut Microbiome of Mice with Induced Inflammation.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Causal impact of elevated body mass index on diabetic kidney disease: an integrated Mendelian randomization and Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 analysis.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Genetic insights into blood urea nitrogen as a risk factor for coronary artery disease: a Mendelian randomization study in East Asians.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Long nighttime sleep duration and risk of renal tubular damage: evidence from rural China and a Mendelian randomization analysis.Renal failure · 2025Observational
- Causal associations between environmental factors and risk of IgA nephropathy and membranous nephropathy: a bidirectional Mendelian randomization and mediation analysis.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Causal associations between circulating metabolites and chronic kidney disease: a Mendelian randomization study.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization analysis of iron status and uremia: no evidence of a causal relationship.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Plasma complement proteins as biomarkers and therapeutic targets in chronic kidney disease: a Mendelian randomization analysis.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Association between circulating Klotho levels and hypertension: insights from NHANES, Mendelian randomization, and an Asian cohort.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Assessing genetic causal relationship between milk fat content and chronic kidney disease: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Mitochondrial DNA copy number as a genetic determinant of renal function: insights from bidirectional Mendelian randomization.Renal failure · 2025Article
- The association between immune cells and acute kidney injury: insights from Mendelian randomization.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Immune cells mediate the effect of plasma lipidomes on IgA nephropathy: a Mendelian randomization study.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Educational attainment, body mass index, and smoking as mediators in kidney disease risk: a two-step Mendelian randomization study.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Causal relationship between genetically predicted Enzyme and Tinnitus risk: a two-sample bi-directional mendelian randomization study.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Identifying risk factors for disease onset and progression has been a core focus in nephrology research. Mendelian Randomization (MR) has emerged as a powerful genetic epidemiological approach, utilizing genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to establish causal relationships between modifiable risk factors and kidney disease outcomes. MR uses genetic variants as instrumental variables to infer causal relationships between exposures and disease outcomes. This method leverages the natural randomization of genetic variants to balance confounders, akin to matched cohorts in observational research. The rapid increase in MR studies on kidney disease poses challenges for journals and peer reviewers, especially clinicians unfamiliar with the methodology. High-quality MR studies use strong, well-validated genetic instruments with clear biological relevance, thoroughly testing for pleiotropy and confounding factors using methods like MR-Egger. Sensitivity analyses, such as MR-PRESSO, should ensure findings remain consistent across various assumptions. Effect sizes with confidence intervals should be reported and discussed within established biological mechanisms. Additionally, limitations must be transparently addressed, with recommendations for replication in future studies, to strengthen findings. This article guides readers in understanding MR application in nephrology and identifying high-quality MR studies, helping peers avoid pitfalls while seizing new opportunities in advancing kidney disease research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.