MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916194715 · doi:10.1136/bmj.l1042

Body mass index and all cause mortality in HUNT and UK Biobank studies: linear and non-linear mendelian randomisation analyses

2019· article· en· W2916194715 on OpenAlexaff
Yi‐Qian Sun, Stephen Burgess, James R Staley, Angela Wood, Steven Bell, Stephen Kaptoge, Qi Guo, Thomas R Bolton, Amy M. Mason, Adam S. Butterworth, Emanuele Di Angelantonio, Gunnhild Åberge Vie, Johan Hå‌kon Bjø‌rngaard, Jonas Minet Kinge, Yue Chen, Xiao‐Mei Mai

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchDepartment of Health and Social CareBritish Heart FoundationWellcome Trust
KeywordsBiobankBody mass indexMendelian inheritanceIndex (typography)MedicineMendelian randomizationGerontologyBioinformaticsEnvironmental healthComputer scienceBiologyGeneticsInternal medicineWorld Wide WebGenotypeGenetic variants

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EDITOR'S NOTE: Please see the Editor's Note (doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1042) on Methodological Criticism and an Updated Analysis OBJECTIVE: To investigate the shape of the causal relation between body mass index (BMI) and mortality. DESIGN: Linear and non-linear mendelian randomisation analyses. SETTING: Nord-Trøndelag Health (HUNT) Study (Norway) and UK Biobank (United Kingdom). PARTICIPANTS: Middle to early late aged participants of European descent: 56 150 from the HUNT Study and 366 385 from UK Biobank. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All cause and cause specific (cardiovascular, cancer, and non-cardiovascular non-cancer) mortality. RESULTS: 12 015 and 10 344 participants died during a median of 18.5 and 7.0 years of follow-up in the HUNT Study and UK Biobank, respectively. Linear mendelian randomisation analyses indicated an overall positive association between genetically predicted BMI and the risk of all cause mortality. An increase of 1 unit in genetically predicted BMI led to a 5% (95% confidence interval 1% to 8%) higher risk of mortality in overweight participants (BMI 25.0-29.9) and a 9% (4% to 14%) higher risk of mortality in obese participants (BMI ≥30.0) but a 34% (16% to 48%) lower risk in underweight (BMI <18.5) and a 14% (-1% to 27%) lower risk in low normal weight participants (BMI 18.5-19.9). Non-linear mendelian randomisation indicated a J shaped relation between genetically predicted BMI and the risk of all cause mortality, with the lowest risk at a BMI of around 22-25 for the overall sample. Subgroup analyses by smoking status, however, suggested an always-increasing relation of BMI with mortality in never smokers and a J shaped relation in ever smokers. CONCLUSIONS: The previously observed J shaped relation between BMI and risk of all cause mortality appears to have a causal basis, but subgroup analyses by smoking status revealed that the BMI-mortality relation is likely comprised of at least two distinct curves, rather than one J shaped relation. An increased risk of mortality for being underweight was only evident in ever smokers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations208
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207