ArticleJournal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association2024
Evaluating the impact of
Article in Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Criteria and Genetic Basis of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Narrative Review.Metabolites · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is prevalent among reproductive-aged women and is categorized by hormonal imbalances, irregular menstrual cycles, and challenges with fertility. PCOS affects approximately 3.6% of women globally, with prevalence varying by region. The luteinizing hormone/choriogonadotropin receptor ( Material and Methods: An extensive literature review was carried out using Embase, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases to identify research studies exploring the association between Results: Analyzing data from 10 studies involving 1,431 PCOS cases and 1,317 controls, the findings revealed no significant associations in most genetic models: allele (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.54-1.49), dominant (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.47-1.18), recessive (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.41-1.57), and over-dominant (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.69-1.85). Subgroup analyses by ethnicity (Arabs, Asians, Caucasians) consistently showed no significant correlations, except a protective effect in Caucasians (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.34-0.95) in the AA vs. aa comparison. Sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness, and there was no indication of publication bias. Power analysis validated adequate sample sizes, and protein-protein interaction networks underscored biological relevance. Conclusion: The meta-analysis concluded that no significant connection was observed between the
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.