Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 9, 2025

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Effect of selection bias on two sample summary data based Mendelian randomization
Kai Wang1, Shizhong Han2,3
1Department of Biostatistics, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, 52242, USA. kai-wang@uiowa.edu.
Abstract:
Mendelian randomization (MR) is becoming more and more popular for inferring causal relationship between an exposure and a trait. Typically, instrument SNPs are selected from an exposure GWAS based on their summary statistics and the same summary statistics on the selected SNPs are used for subsequent analyses. However, this practice suffers from selection bias and can invalidate MR methods, as showcased via two popular methods: the summary data-based MR (SMR) method and the two-sample MR Steiger method. The SMR method is conservative while the MR Steiger method can be either conservative or liberal. A simple and yet more powerful alternative to SMR is proposed.
Insights
Mendelian randomization (MR) methods can be invalidated by selection bias when choosing instrument SNPs. A new, simple, and powerful alternative to the summary data-based MR (SMR) method is proposed to address this bias.
Area of Science:
- Genetics
- Biostatistics
- Epidemiology
Background:
- Mendelian randomization (MR) is increasingly used to infer causal relationships between exposures and traits.
- Current MR practices often involve selecting instrument single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) based on exposure Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) summary statistics.
- This selection process can introduce bias, potentially invalidating MR findings.
Purpose of the Study:
- To highlight the selection bias inherent in common MR instrument selection practices.
- To demonstrate how this bias affects popular MR methods like summary data-based MR (SMR) and two-sample MR Steiger.
- To propose a novel, more powerful, and simpler alternative to the SMR method.
Main Methods:
- Analysis of selection bias in instrument SNP selection for Mendelian randomization.
- Evaluation of the impact of selection bias on the SMR and MR Steiger methods.
- Development and proposal of a new MR method as an alternative to SMR.
Main Results:
- The common practice of selecting instrument SNPs from GWAS summary statistics can lead to selection bias.
- This bias can cause the SMR method to be conservative and the MR Steiger method to be either conservative or liberal.
- A simple and more powerful alternative to the SMR method is presented.
Conclusions:
- Selection bias is a critical issue in Mendelian randomization that can compromise the validity of causal inference.
- Existing popular MR methods are susceptible to this bias.
- The proposed novel MR method offers a more robust and powerful approach compared to SMR.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Regression Toward the Mean
One-Way ANOVA: Equal Sample Sizes
Different sample means can result in different values for the variance estimate: variance between samples. This is because the variance between samples is calculated as the product of the sample size and the variance between the...
Study Design in Statistics
Does aspirin reduce the risk of heart attacks? Is one brand of fertilizer more effective at growing roses than another? Is fatigue as dangerous to a driver as the influence of alcohol? Questions like these are answered using randomized experiments with proper...
Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks

