Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
IntroductionAlthough the relationship between psychiatric disorders and Parkinson's disease (PD) has attracted continuous research attention, the causal linkage between them has not reached a definite conclusion.MethodsTo identify the causal relationship between psychiatric disorders and PD, we used public summary-level data from the most recent and largest genome-wide association studies (GWASs) on psychiatric disorders and PD to conduct a bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR). We applied stringent control steps in instrumental variable selection using the Mendelian randomization pleiotropy residual sum and outlier (MR-PRESSO) method to rule out pleiotropy. The inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method was used to identify the causal relationship between psychiatric disorders and PD. Multiple MR analysis methods, including MR-Egger, weighted-median, and leave-one-out analyses, were used for sensitivity analysis, followed by heterogeneity tests. Further validation and reverse MR analyses were conducted to strengthen the results of the forward MR analysis.ResultsThe lack of sufficient estimation results could suggest a causal relationship between psychiatric disorders and PD in the forward MR analysis. However, the subsequent reverse MR analysis detected a causal relationship between PD and bipolar disorder (IVW: odds ratios [OR] =1.053, 95% confidence interval [CI] =1.02-1.09, p = 0.001). Further analysis demonstrated a causal relationship between genetically predicted PD and the risk of bipolar disorder subtype. No pleiotropy or heterogeneity was detected in the analyses.DiscussionOur study suggested that while psychiatric disorders and traits might play various roles in the risk of developing PD, PD might also be involved in the risk of developing psychiatric disorders.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.