↓ Skip to main content

MR-PheWAS: hypothesis prioritization among potential causal effects of body mass index on many outcomes, using Mendelian randomization

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
86 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
MR-PheWAS: hypothesis prioritization among potential causal effects of body mass index on many outcomes, using Mendelian randomization
Published in
Scientific Reports, November 2015
DOI 10.1038/srep16645
Pubmed ID
Authors

Louise A. C. Millard, Neil M. Davies, Nic J. Timpson, Kate Tilling, Peter A. Flach, George Davey Smith

Abstract

Observational cohort studies can provide rich datasets with a diverse range of phenotypic variables. However, hypothesis-driven epidemiological analyses by definition only test particular hypotheses chosen by researchers. Furthermore, observational analyses may not provide robust evidence of causality, as they are susceptible to confounding, reverse causation and measurement error. Using body mass index (BMI) as an exemplar, we demonstrate a novel extension to the phenome-wide association study (pheWAS) approach, using automated screening with genotypic instruments to screen for causal associations amongst any number of phenotypic outcomes. We used a sample of 8,121 children from the ALSPAC dataset, and tested the linear association of a BMI-associated allele score with 172 phenotypic outcomes (with variable sample sizes). We also performed an instrumental variable analysis to estimate the causal effect of BMI on each phenotype. We found 21 of the 172 outcomes were associated with the allele score at an unadjusted p < 0.05 threshold, and use Bonferroni corrections, permutation testing and estimates of the false discovery rate to consider the strength of results given the number of tests performed. The most strongly associated outcomes included leptin, lipid profile, and blood pressure. We also found novel evidence of effects of BMI on a global self-worth score.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Unknown 125 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 25%
Researcher 24 19%
Student > Master 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Professor 7 6%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 24 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 10%
Computer Science 5 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 32 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,815,738
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#30,623
of 127,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,598
of 253,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#585
of 2,540 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 127,567 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 253,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,540 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.