Share
𝕏 Facebook LinkedIn

Causal associations between mobile phone usage and glaucoma risk: A Mendelian randomization

PAPER manual Medicine (Baltimore) 2024 Other Effect: harm Evidence: Low

Abstract

Causal associations between mobile phone usage and glaucoma risk: A Mendelian randomization study Song R, Wang Y, Kong Y, Fan X, Yuan C, Zha X. Causal associations between mobile phone usage and glaucoma risk: A Mendelian randomization study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Nov 29;103(48):e40666. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000040666. Abstract Previous research has indicated a possible link between mobile phone usage and the incidence of glaucoma. This study employs a 2-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to examine the causal relationship between mobile phone use and glaucoma risk. We used single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from publicly accessible genome-wide association study (GWAS) datasets as instrumental variables (IVs). The primary analytical method was the inverse variance weighted (IVW) approach, with MR-Egger and weighted median analyses serving as complementary methods. Sensitivity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and MR-Egger regression. The results demonstrate a causal effect of mobile phone usage on an increased risk of glaucoma (OR IVW = 1.358, 95% CI: 1.052-1.752, P = .019; OR MR- Egger = 1.882, 95% CI: 0.53-6.682, P = .337; OR Weighted median = 1.387, 95% CI: 1.012-1.900, P = .042; OR MR-PRESSO = 1.358, 95% CI: 1.052-1.752, P = .026). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness and reliability of these findings. The study identifies mobile phone usage as a potentially modifiable risk factor for glaucoma, providing new avenues for exploring the specific mechanisms underlying these ocular disorders. Open access paper: journals.lww.com journal/fulltext/2024/11290/causal_associations_between_mobile_phone_usage_and.12.aspx

AI evidence extraction

At a glance
Study type
Other
Effect direction
harm
Population
Sample size
Exposure
mobile phone
Evidence strength
Low
Confidence: 74% · Peer-reviewed: yes

Main findings

A 2-sample Mendelian randomization analysis using GWAS-derived SNP instruments found evidence consistent with a causal association between mobile phone usage and increased glaucoma risk (e.g., IVW OR=1.358, 95% CI 1.052–1.752; weighted median OR=1.387, 95% CI 1.012–1.900). Sensitivity analyses were reported to support robustness.

Outcomes measured

  • glaucoma risk

Limitations

  • Exposure characteristics (e.g., RF band/frequency, SAR, duration/intensity of use) not described in the abstract.
  • Population details and sample size not reported in the abstract.
  • MR-Egger estimate was imprecise and not statistically significant (wide CI), indicating uncertainty for that method.
View raw extracted JSON
{
    "study_type": "other",
    "exposure": {
        "band": null,
        "source": "mobile phone",
        "frequency_mhz": null,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": null,
    "sample_size": null,
    "outcomes": [
        "glaucoma risk"
    ],
    "main_findings": "A 2-sample Mendelian randomization analysis using GWAS-derived SNP instruments found evidence consistent with a causal association between mobile phone usage and increased glaucoma risk (e.g., IVW OR=1.358, 95% CI 1.052–1.752; weighted median OR=1.387, 95% CI 1.012–1.900). Sensitivity analyses were reported to support robustness.",
    "effect_direction": "harm",
    "limitations": [
        "Exposure characteristics (e.g., RF band/frequency, SAR, duration/intensity of use) not described in the abstract.",
        "Population details and sample size not reported in the abstract.",
        "MR-Egger estimate was imprecise and not statistically significant (wide CI), indicating uncertainty for that method."
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "Mendelian randomization",
        "2-sample MR",
        "GWAS",
        "SNP",
        "mobile phone usage",
        "glaucoma",
        "IVW",
        "MR-Egger",
        "weighted median",
        "MR-PRESSO"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract/metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.