4.7 Article

Cognitive ability and physical health: a Mendelian randomization study

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-02837-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. University of Edinburgh Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology, part of the cross council Lifelong Health and Wellbeing Initiative [MR/K026992/1]
  2. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC)
  3. Medical Research Council (MRC)
  4. Medical Research Council [1578661, MC_UP_A620_1015, MC_qA137853, MR/K026992/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. MRC [MC_UP_A620_1015] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Causes of the association between cognitive ability and health remain unknown, but may reflect a shared genetic aetiology. This study examines the causal genetic associations between cognitive ability and physical health. We carried out two-sample Mendelian randomization analyses using the inverse-variance weighted method to test for causality between later life cognitive ability, educational attainment (as a proxy for cognitive ability in youth), BMI, height, systolic blood pressure, coronary artery disease, and type 2 diabetes using data from six independent GWAS consortia and the UK Biobank sample (N = 112 151). BMI, systolic blood pressure, coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes showed negative associations with cognitive ability; height was positively associated with cognitive ability. The analyses provided no evidence for casual associations from health to cognitive ability. In the other direction, higher educational attainment predicted lower BMI, systolic blood pressure, coronary artery disease, type 2 diabetes, and taller stature. The analyses indicated no causal association from educational attainment to physical health. The lack of evidence for causal associations between cognitive ability, educational attainment, and physical health could be explained by weak instrumental variables, poorly measured outcomes, or the small number of disease cases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据