You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Considering the different results from MRlap and TwosampleMR, I used the IVW data from TwosanmpleMR to create a MR_results list and used Ldsc data from MRlap to create a Ldsc_results.Then I used the get_correction function from MRlap. I found the the correcred beta was too bigger.
corrected effect: 0.401 ( 0.297 ), observed effect: 0.106(0.0366)
I want to know why the corrected beta value was so bigger.And even the same GWAS data , the IVW result from MRlap aiso was bigger than TwosampleMR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
The uncorrected association (beta=0.106, SE=0.0366, p=0.0038) is statistically significant. But the correct effect is no longer significant (beta=0.401, SE=0.297, p=0.18) so you should not read too much in to the larger main effect (as the 95% CIs will be very wide, and include the null).
Luke
Considering the different results from MRlap and TwosampleMR, I used the IVW data from TwosanmpleMR to create a MR_results list and used Ldsc data from MRlap to create a Ldsc_results.Then I used the get_correction function from MRlap. I found the the correcred beta was too bigger.
corrected effect: 0.401 ( 0.297 ), observed effect: 0.106(0.0366)
I want to know why the corrected beta value was so bigger.And even the same GWAS data , the IVW result from MRlap aiso was bigger than TwosampleMR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: