MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965302275 · doi:10.1136/bmj.l4410

Genetic predisposition to increased serum calcium, bone mineral density, and fracture risk in individuals with normal calcium levels: mendelian randomisation study

2019· review· en· W2965302275 on OpenAlexafffund
Agustin Cerani, Sirui Zhou, Vincenzo Forgetta, John Morris, Katerina Trajanoska, Fernando Rivadeneira, Susanna C. Larsson, Karl Michaëlsson, J. Brent Richards

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéMedical Research CouncilJewish General HospitalEuropean CommissionKing's College LondonZonMwCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekWellcome Trust
KeywordsConfidence intervalBone mineralCalciumOdds ratioMedicineBone densityOsteoporosisCohortInternal medicineGenetic predispositionMendelian inheritancePhysiologyEndocrinologyGeneticsBiologyDiseaseGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine if genetically increased serum calcium levels are associated with improved bone mineral density and a reduction in osteoporotic fractures. DESIGN: Mendelian randomisation study. SETTING: Cohorts used included: the UK Biobank cohort, providing genotypic and estimated bone mineral density data; 25 cohorts from UK, USA, Europe, and China, providing genotypic and fracture data; and 17 cohorts from Europe, providing genotypic and serum calcium data (summary level statistics). PARTICIPANTS: A genome-wide association meta-analysis of serum calcium levels in up to 61 079 individuals was used to identify genetic determinants of serum calcium levels. The UK Biobank study was used to assess the association of genetic predisposition to increased serum calcium with estimated bone mineral density derived from heel ultrasound in 426 824 individuals who had, on average, calcium levels in the normal range. A fracture genome-wide association meta-analysis comprising 24 cohorts and the UK Biobank including a total of 76 549 cases and 470 164 controls, who, on average, also had calcium levels in the normal range was then performed. RESULTS: , 95% confidence interval -0.059 to 0.066; P=0.92) or a reduced risk of fractures (odds ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.15; P=0.85) in inverse-variance weighted mendelian randomisation analyses. Sensitivity analyses did not provide evidence of pleiotropic effects. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic predisposition to increased serum calcium levels in individuals with normal calcium levels is not associated with an increase in estimated bone mineral density and does not provide clinically relevant protection against fracture. Whether such predisposition mimics the effect of short term calcium supplementation is not known. Given that the same genetically derived increase in serum calcium is associated with an increased risk of coronary artery disease, widespread calcium supplementation in the general population could provide more risk than benefit.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations43
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207