MR Corge: sensitivity analysis of Mendelian randomization based on the core gene hypothesis for polygenic exposures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY: Mendelian randomization is being utilized to assess causal effects of polygenic exposures, where many genetic instruments are subject to horizontal pleiotropy. Existing methods for detecting and correcting for horizontal pleiotropy have important assumptions that may not be fulfilled. Built upon the core gene hypothesis, we developed MR Corge for performing sensitivity analysis of Mendelian randomization. MR Corge identifies a small number of putative core instruments that are more likely to affect genes with a direct biological role in an exposure and obtains causal effect estimates based on these instruments, thereby reducing the risk of horizontal pleiotropy. Using positive and negative controls, we demonstrated that MR Corge estimates aligned with established biomedical knowledge and the results of randomized controlled trials. MR Corge may be widely applied to investigate polygenic exposure-outcome relationships. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: An open-sourced R package is available at https://github.com/zhwm/MRCorge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".