PofoliaShared via Pofolia

American Journal of Epidemiology· 2013Q1

Efficient Design for Mendelian Randomization Studies: Subsample and 2-Sample Instrumental Variable Estimators

Brandon L. Pierce, Stephen Burgess

Short summary

Collecting exposure data from a subset of participants in Mendelian randomization (MR) studies is a cost-efficient strategy that often has negligible effects on statistical power compared to collecting data from all participants.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Collecting exposure data from a subset of participants in MR studies is cost-efficient.
  • Subsampling often has negligible effects on statistical power compared to complete-data analysis.
  • The size of the required subset for maximum power depends on the strength of the genetic instrument.
  • Weak instruments can lead to bias towards the null or confounded association based on subset size.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Mendelian randomization (MR) is a method for estimating the causal relationship between an exposure and an outcome using a genetic factor as an instrumental variable (IV) for the exposure. In the traditional MR setting, data on the IV, exposure, and outcome are available for all participants. However, obtaining complete exposure data may be difficult in some settings, due to high measurement costs or lack of appropriate biospecimens. We used simulated data sets to assess statistical power and bias for MR when exposure data are available for a subset (or an independent set) of participants. We show that obtaining exposure data for a subset of participants is a cost-efficient strategy, often having negligible effects on power in comparison with a traditional complete-data analysis. The size of the subset needed to achieve maximum power depends on IV strength, and maximum power is approximately equal to the power of traditional IV estimators. Weak IVs are shown to lead to bias towards the null when the subsample is small and towards the confounded association when the subset is relatively large. Various approaches for confidence interval calculation are considered. These results have important implications for reducing the costs and increasing the feasibility of MR studies.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. American Journal of Epidemiology, 2013 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Statistics and Probability

Statistics and ProbabilityMathematics