Navigating the shifting Mendelian randomisation landscape: some observations and suggestions for editors, reviewers and investigators.

As members of the editorial board of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (JECH), we have noticed a rapid increase in recent years in submissions using Mendelian randomisation (MR). While this surge reflects MR’s clear potential in epidemiological research, many manuscripts fail to meet basic standards of scientific rigour, resulting in rejection without the need for external evaluation—a pattern that colleagues at other journals have also observed. Prompted by these persistent concerns, in late 2023, our Editorial Board took the decision to raise the standard requirements for MR submissions. Throughout the past year, we have implemented stricter guidelines and had fewer MR submissions externally evaluated. Here, we explain the rationale behind these updates, highlight the most frequent pitfalls we encounter, and offers advice for conducting high-quality MR studies that we hope will be equally useful at other journals.

Publication Details

Journal
Apollo (University of Cambridge)
Published
2025-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17863/cam.117466
Primary Topic
Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Navigating the shifting Mendelian randomisation landscape: some observations and suggestions for editors, reviewers and investigators.

Apollo (University of Cambridge)
Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
article

Navigating the shifting Mendelian randomisation landscape: some observations and suggestions for editors, reviewers and investigators.

article en

Abstract

As members of the editorial board of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (JECH), we have noticed a rapid increase in recent years in submissions using Mendelian randomisation (MR). While this surge reflects MR’s clear potential in epidemiological research, many manuscripts fail to meet basic standards of scientific rigour, resulting in rejection without the need for external evaluation—a pattern that colleagues at other journals have also observed. Prompted by these persistent concerns, in late 2023, our Editorial Board took the decision to raise the standard requirements for MR submissions. Throughout the past year, we have implemented stricter guidelines and had fewer MR submissions externally evaluated. Here, we explain the rationale behind these updates, highlight the most frequent pitfalls we encounter, and offers advice for conducting high-quality MR studies that we hope will be equally useful at other journals.

Apollo (University of Cambridge)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.