Evidence mapPaperPMID 34488284Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental reproductive medicine2021

Update on polycystic ovary syndrome.

Jin Ju Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental reproductive medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Jin Ju KimDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Healthcare System Gangnam Center, Seoul National University Hospital and the Institute of Reproductive Medicine and Population, Medical Research Center, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common disorder in reproductive-age women. In 2018, an international evidence-based guideline announced recommendations spanning a wide range of issues on the assessment and management of PCOS. From the 166 recommendations, the present study reviews those that are of particular clinical relevance for daily practice and introduces other relevant studies that have been published since the global guideline. The 2018 guideline increased the antral follicle count cutoff for the diagnosis of PCOS from 12 to 20 when using a high-frequency probe. Hirsutism was defined as having a score of ≥4-6 based on a lower percentile of 85%-90% or cluster analysis, which was lower than the traditionally used 95th percentile-based cutoff. The diagnosis of PCOS in adolescents is challenging, and irregular menstruation was defined carefully according to years from menarche. The use of ultrasonography for the diagnosis of PCOS was restricted to those 8 years after menarche. As medication for non-fertility indications, combined oral contraceptives are the first-line drug. Metformin, in addition to lifestyle modifications, should be considered for adult patients with a body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 for the management of weight and metabolic outcomes. An aromatase inhibitor is the recommended first-line medication for ovulation induction, a subsequent individual patient data meta-analysis also reported the same conclusion. Whether the new global guideline will be fully adopted by many specialists and change clinical practice is open to question. Further studies are needed to better understand and manage PCOS patients well.

Indexed as

HirsutismHyperandrogenismInfertilityOvulation inductionPolycystic ovary syndrome

Identifiers

PMID34488284
PMCPMC8421664

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.