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

Medicine (Baltimore) · 2024 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream

HarmLow evidencePaper 316

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…

Study snapshot

PublicationMedicine (Baltimore) · 2024

Study typeother

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingLow

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

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeother

Effect directionharm

PopulationNot supplied

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureNot supplied

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

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": 0.74,
  "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 and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000040666
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library