We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Observational studies consistently report associations between tobacco use, cannabis use and mental illness. However, the extent to which this association reflects an increased risk of new-onset mental illness is unclear and may be biased by unmeasured confounding.
Methods
A systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD42021243903). Electronic databases were searched until November 2022. Longitudinal studies in general population samples assessing tobacco and/or cannabis use and reporting the association (e.g. risk ratio [RR]) with incident anxiety, mood, or psychotic disorders were included. Estimates were combined using random-effects meta-analyses. Bias was explored using a modified Newcastle–Ottawa Scale, confounder matrix, E-values, and Doi plots.
Results
Seventy-five studies were included. Tobacco use was associated with mood disorders (K = 43; RR: 1.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30–1.47), but not anxiety disorders (K = 7; RR: 1.21, 95% CI 0.87–1.68) and evidence for psychotic disorders was influenced by treatment of outliers (K = 4, RR: 3.45, 95% CI 2.63–4.53; K = 5, RR: 2.06, 95% CI 0.98–4.29). Cannabis use was associated with psychotic disorders (K = 4; RR: 3.19, 95% CI 2.07–4.90), but not mood (K = 7; RR: 1.31, 95% CI 0.92–1.86) or anxiety disorders (K = 7; RR: 1.10, 95% CI 0.99–1.22). Confounder matrices and E-values suggested potential overestimation of effects. Only 27% of studies were rated as high quality.
Conclusions
Both substances were associated with psychotic disorders and tobacco use was associated with mood disorders. There was no clear evidence of an association between cannabis use and mood or anxiety disorders. Limited high-quality studies underscore the need for future research using robust causal inference approaches (e.g. evidence triangulation).
At the basis of many important research questions is causality – does X causally impact Y? For behavioural and psychiatric traits, answering such questions can be particularly challenging, as they are highly complex and multifactorial. ‘Triangulation’ refers to prospectively choosing, conducting and integrating several methods to investigate a specific causal question. If different methods, with different sources of bias, all indicate a causal effect, the finding is much less likely to be spurious. While triangulation can be a powerful approach, its interpretation differs across (sub)fields and there are no formal guidelines. Here, we aim to provide clarity and guidance around the process of triangulation for behavioural and psychiatric epidemiology, so that results of existing triangulation studies can be better interpreted, and new triangulation studies better designed.
Methods
We first introduce the concept of triangulation and how it is applied in epidemiological investigations of behavioural and psychiatric traits. Next, we put forth a systematic step-by-step guide, that can be used to design a triangulation study (accompanied by a worked example). Finally, we provide important general recommendations for future studies.
Results
While the literature contains varying interpretations, triangulation generally refers to an investigation that assesses the robustness of a potential causal finding by explicitly combining different approaches. This may include multiple types of statistical methods, the same method applied in multiple samples, or multiple different measurements of the variable(s) of interest. In behavioural and psychiatric epidemiology, triangulation commonly includes prospective cohort studies, natural experiments and/or genetically informative designs (including the increasingly popular method of Mendelian randomization). The guide that we propose aids the planning and interpreting of triangulation by prompting crucial considerations. Broadly, its steps are as follows: determine your causal question, draw a directed acyclic graph, identify available resources and samples, identify suitable methodological approaches, further specify the causal question for each method, explicate the effects of potential biases and, pre-specify expected results. We illustrated the guide’s use by considering the question: ‘Does maternal tobacco smoking during pregnancy cause offspring depression?’.
Conclusions
In the current era of big data, and with increasing (public) availability of large-scale datasets, triangulation will become increasingly relevant in identifying robust risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes. Our hope is that this review and guide will provide clarity and direction, as well as stimulate more researchers to apply triangulation to causal questions around behavioural and psychiatric traits.
Previous observational epidemiological studies have suggested that coffee consumption during pregnancy may affect fetal neurodevelopment. However, results are inconsistent and may represent correlational rather than causal relationships. The present study investigated whether maternal coffee consumption was observationally associated and causally related to offspring childhood neurodevelopmental difficulties (NDs) in the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study.
Methods
The observational relationships between maternal/paternal coffee consumption (before and during pregnancy) and offspring NDs were assessed using linear regression analyses (N = 58694 mother-child duos; N = 22 576 father-child duos). To investigate potential causal relationships, individual-level (N = 46 245 mother-child duos) and two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses were conducted using genetic variants previously associated with coffee consumption as instrumental variables.
Results
We observed positive associations between maternal coffee consumption and offspring difficulties with social-communication/behavioral flexibility, and inattention/hyperactive-impulsive behavior (multiple testing corrected p < 0.005). Paternal coffee consumption (negative control) was not observationally associated with the outcomes. After adjusting for potential confounders (smoking, alcohol, education and income), the maternal associations attenuated to the null. MR analyses suggested that increased maternal coffee consumption was causally associated with social-communication difficulties (individual-level: beta = 0.128, se = 0.043, p = 0.003; two-sample: beta = 0.348, se = 0.141, p = 0.010). However, individual-level MR analyses that modelled potential pleiotropic pathways found the effect diminished (beta = 0.088, se = 0.049, p = 0.071). Individual-level MR analyses yielded similar estimates (heterogeneity p = 0.619) for the causal effect of coffee consumption on social communication difficulties in maternal coffee consumers (beta = 0.153, se = 0.071, p = 0.032) and non-consumers (beta = 0.107, se = 0.134, p = 0.424).
Conclusions
Together, our results provide little evidence for a causal effect of maternal coffee consumption on offspring NDs.
Maternal vitamin-D and omega-3 fatty acid (DHA) deficiencies during pregnancy have previously been associated with offspring neurodevelopmental traits. However, observational study designs cannot distinguish causal effects from confounding.
Methods
First, we conducted Mendelian randomisation (MR) using genetic instruments for vitamin-D and DHA identified in independent genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Outcomes were (1) GWAS for traits related to autism and ADHD, generated in the Norwegian mother, father, and child cohort study (MoBa) from 3 to 8 years, (2) autism and ADHD diagnoses. Second, we used mother–father–child trio-MR in MoBa (1) to test causal effects through maternal nutrient levels, (2) to test effects of child nutrient levels, and (3) as a paternal negative control.
Results
Associations between higher maternal vitamin-D levels on lower ADHD related traits at age 5 did not remain after controlling for familial genetic predisposition using trio-MR. Furthermore, we did not find evidence for causal maternal effects of vitamin-D/DHA levels on other offspring traits or diagnoses. In the reverse direction, there was evidence for a causal effect of autism genetic predisposition on lower vitamin-D levels and of ADHD genetic predisposition on lower DHA levels.
Conclusions
Triangulating across study designs, we did not find evidence for maternal effects. We add to a growing body of evidence that suggests that previous observational associations are likely biased by genetic confounding. Consequently, maternal supplementation is unlikely to influence these offspring neurodevelopmental traits. Notably, genetic predisposition to ADHD and autism was associated with lower DHA and vitamin-D levels respectively, suggesting previous associations might have been due to reverse causation.
In our commentary we ask whether we should ultimately endeavour to find the deep causes of behaviours? Then we discuss two extensions of the proposed framework: (1) Mendelian randomisation and (2) hypothesis-free gene–environment interaction (leveraging heterogeneity in genetic associations). These complementary methods help move us towards second-generation causal knowledge, ultimately understanding mechanistic pathways and identifying more effective intervention targets.
Observational studies have found associations between smoking and both poorer cognitive ability and lower educational attainment; however, evaluating causality is challenging. We used two complementary methods to explore this.
Methods
We conducted observational analyses of up to 12 004 participants in a cohort study (Study One) and Mendelian randomisation (MR) analyses using summary and cohort data (Study Two). Outcome measures were cognitive ability at age 15 and educational attainment at age 16 (Study One), and educational attainment and fluid intelligence (Study Two).
Results
Study One: heaviness of smoking at age 15 was associated with lower cognitive ability at age 15 and lower educational attainment at age 16. Adjustment for potential confounders partially attenuated findings (e.g. fully adjusted cognitive ability β −0.736, 95% CI −1.238 to −0.233, p = 0.004; fully adjusted educational attainment β −1.254, 95% CI −1.597 to −0.911, p < 0.001). Study Two: MR indicated that both smoking initiation and lifetime smoking predict lower educational attainment (e.g. smoking initiation to educational attainment inverse-variance weighted MR β −0.197, 95% CI −0.223 to −0.171, p = 1.78 × 10−49). Educational attainment results were robust to sensitivity analyses, while analyses of general cognitive ability were less so.
Conclusion
We find some evidence of a causal effect of smoking on lower educational attainment, but not cognitive ability. Triangulation of evidence across observational and MR methods is a strength, but the genetic variants associated with smoking initiation may be pleiotropic, suggesting caution in interpreting these results. The nature of this pleiotropy warrants further study.
Previous literature has demonstrated a strong association between cigarette smoking, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts. This association has not previously been examined in a causal inference framework and could have important implications for suicide prevention strategies.
Aims
We aimed to examine the evidence for an association between smoking behaviours (initiation, smoking status, heaviness, lifetime smoking) and suicidal thoughts or attempts by triangulating across observational and Mendelian randomisation analyses.
Method
First, in the UK Biobank, we calculated observed associations between smoking behaviours and suicidal thoughts or attempts. Second, we used Mendelian randomisation to explore the relationship between smoking and suicide attempts and ideation, using genetic variants as instruments to reduce bias from residual confounding and reverse causation.
Results
Our observational analysis showed a relationship between smoking behaviour, suicidal ideation and attempts, particularly between smoking initiation and suicide attempts (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% CI 1.91–2.26; P < 0.001). The Mendelian randomisation analysis and single-nucleotide polymorphism analysis, however, did not support this (odds ratio for lifetime smoking on suicidal ideation, 0.050; 95% CI −0.027 to 0.127; odds ratio on suicide attempts, 0.053; 95% CI, −0.003 to 0.110). Despite past literature showing a positive dose-response relationship, our results showed no clear evidence for a causal effect of smoking on suicidal ideation or attempts.
Conclusions
This was the first Mendelian randomisation study to explore the effect of smoking on suicidal ideation and attempts. Our results suggest that, despite observed associations, there is no clear evidence for a causal effect.
Smoking prevalence is higher amongst individuals with schizophrenia and depression compared with the general population. Mendelian randomisation (MR) can examine whether this association is causal using genetic variants identified in genome-wide association studies (GWAS).
Methods
We conducted two-sample MR to explore the bi-directional effects of smoking on schizophrenia and depression. For smoking behaviour, we used (1) smoking initiation GWAS from the GSCAN consortium and (2) we conducted our own GWAS of lifetime smoking behaviour (which captures smoking duration, heaviness and cessation) in a sample of 462690 individuals from the UK Biobank. We validated this instrument using positive control outcomes (e.g. lung cancer). For schizophrenia and depression we used GWAS from the PGC consortium.
Results
There was strong evidence to suggest smoking is a risk factor for both schizophrenia (odds ratio (OR) 2.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.67–3.08, p < 0.001) and depression (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.71–2.32, p < 0.001). Results were consistent across both lifetime smoking and smoking initiation. We found some evidence that genetic liability to depression increases smoking (β = 0.091, 95% CI 0.027–0.155, p = 0.005) but evidence was mixed for schizophrenia (β = 0.022, 95% CI 0.005–0.038, p = 0.009) with very weak evidence for an effect on smoking initiation.
Conclusions
These findings suggest that the association between smoking, schizophrenia and depression is due, at least in part, to a causal effect of smoking, providing further evidence for the detrimental consequences of smoking on mental health.
There is increasing evidence that smoking is a risk factor for severe mental illness, including bipolar disorder. Conversely, patients with bipolar disorder might smoke more (often) as a result of the psychiatric disorder.
Aims
We conducted a bidirectional Mendelian randomisation (MR) study to investigate the direction and evidence for a causal nature of the relationship between smoking and bipolar disorder.
Method
We used publicly available summary statistics from genome-wide association studies on bipolar disorder, smoking initiation, smoking heaviness, smoking cessation and lifetime smoking (i.e. a compound measure of heaviness, duration and cessation). We applied analytical methods with different, orthogonal assumptions to triangulate results, including inverse-variance weighted (IVW), MR-Egger, MR-Egger SIMEX, weighted-median, weighted-mode and Steiger-filtered analyses.
Results
Across different methods of MR, consistent evidence was found for a positive effect of smoking on the odds of bipolar disorder (smoking initiation ORIVW = 1.46, 95% CI 1.28–1.66, P = 1.44 × 10−8, lifetime smoking ORIVW = 1.72, 95% CI 1.29–2.28, P = 1.8 × 10−4). The MR analyses of the effect of liability to bipolar disorder on smoking provided no clear evidence of a strong causal effect (smoking heaviness betaIVW = 0.028, 95% CI 0.003–0.053, P = 2.9 × 10−2).
Conclusions
These findings suggest that smoking initiation and lifetime smoking are likely to be a causal risk factor for developing bipolar disorder. We found some evidence that liability to bipolar disorder increased smoking heaviness. Given that smoking is a modifiable risk factor, these findings further support investment into smoking prevention and treatment in order to reduce mental health problems in future generations.
Behavioral traits generally show moderate to strong genetic influence, with heritability estimates of around 50%. Some recent research has suggested that trust may be an exception because it is more strongly influenced by social interactions. In a sample of over 7,000 adolescent twins from the United Kingdom's Twins Early Development Study, we found broad sense heritability estimates of 57% for generalized trust and 51% for trust in friends. Genomic-relatedness-matrix restricted maximum likelihood (GREML) estimates in the same sample indicate that 21% of the narrow sense genetic variance can be explained by common single nucleotide polymorphisms for generalized trust and 43% for trust in friends. As expected, this implies a large amount of unexplained heritability, although power is low for estimating DNA-based heritability. The missing heritability may be accounted for by interactions between DNA and the social environment during development or via gene–environment correlations with rare variants. How these genes and environments correlate seem especially important for the development of trust.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.