Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42487900›Full record

ArticleGout, urate, and crystal deposition disease2025

Mendelian Randomization Studies: A Metric for Quality Evaluation.

Fiorella Rosas-Chavez, Tony R Merriman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gout, urate, and crystal deposition disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Living with PCOS: A Narrative of its Biology, Diagnosis, and Evolving Treatment.Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2026
    Review
  3. The genetics of gout: translation into clinical practice.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Fiorella Rosas-ChavezDivision of Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.
Tony R MerrimanDivision of Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0844-8726

Funding

Translational genomics in gout: From GWAS signal to mechanismR01AR081859 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI TONY R MERRIMAN · 2023 to 2026
$2.3M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR081859
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mendelian randomization (MR) is a genetic epidemiological method used to infer causal relationships between exposures and outcomes. Its application in hyperuricemia and gout has grown exponentially owing to the ready availability of summary statistics from genome-wide association studies and the ease of applying the two-sample MR technique. However, indications of poor study quality suggest the need for systematic evaluation. Objective: This study evaluated the quality of two-sample MR studies on hyperuricemia and gout and developed a scoring system to help reviewers and readers assess their quality and validity. Methods: A systematic review was conducted on 86 two-sample MR studies published between 2016 and 2024. Studies were assessed using a scoring system encompassing study design, statistical methods, result interpretation, and adherence to STROBE-MR guidelines. Scores could range between -9 and 21. Trends in quality over time were analyzed using regression models. Results: Study quality scores ranged from 0 to 19, with a mean of 9.1 and median of 11, demonstrating wide variability. High-quality studies adhered to MR assumptions, used independent datasets, and conducted replication analyses, while lower-quality studies often failed to correct the Conclusion: There is variability in two-sample MR study quality. Our proposed scoring system offers a practical framework for evaluating MR studies, aiding researchers and clinicians in identifying robust findings while promoting higher methodological standards.

Indexed as

cardiometabolic risk factorscausal inferencegouthyperuricemiaMendelian randomization

Identifiers

PMID42487900
PMCPMC13390894

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.