trailGenetic instruments for LDL cholesterol affect cardiovascular risk only through LDL and not through confounding pleiotropy
Mendelian randomization studies show genetically lower LDL cholesterol causally reduces cardiovascular disease risk
Robustness to pleiotropy· for
MR sensitivity analyses find no evidence of directional pleiotropy in the genetic LDL–cardiovascular disease relationship
LDL–cardiovascular causal estimates are concordant across pleiotropy-robust MR methods
Genetic instruments in distinct LDL-related genes yield concordant estimates of LDL's effect on cardiovascular risk
atomic
Multivariable Mendelian randomization adjusting for HDL and triglycerides shows LDL retains an independent causal effect on cardiovascular risk
atomic
+1 more
Pleiotropy of lipid variants· against
Genetic variants that lower LDL cholesterol frequently also affect other lipid traits such as triglycerides and HDL
atomic
claim · empirical · derivedA factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitution →claim page ↗︎
Genetic instruments for LDL cholesterol affect cardiovascular risk only through LDL and not through confounding pleiotropy
↑SupportedEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitution →credence 0.87Credence, from 0 to 1: the Steward's probability that the claim, as stated, is true. Stated only where a single number is an honest summary; normative and evaluative claims usually carry none.constitution →
1depended on by
this rests on ↓
claimA box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitution →argumentA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Arguments are not destinations; click their claims to explore.constitution →✓verifiedThe claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitution →↑supportedEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitution →⇄contestedCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitution →○unsupportedNo credible evidence found, though the claim is not contradicted.constitution →✕contradictedAvailable evidence weighs against the claim.constitution →?unknownInsufficient information to assess.constitution →◌unassessedNo current assessment — the Steward prioritises higher-importance claims, so this one is likely still queued.constitution →verified factopen questionvalue premisesupportsthis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructions →contradictsthis argues against the parentsteward instructions →assumesbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructions →requiresa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructions →Fig. — detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.