ReviewHealth science reports2026
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and Subjective and Objective Assessments of Sleep Quality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Sleep disturbances are increasingly recognized in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), but the evidence remains inconsistent. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate objective sleep abnormalities and subjective sleep complaints in women with PCOS. Methods: We systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed observational studies comparing women with PCOS and women without PCOS. Primary outcomes were objective sleep parameters assessed by polysomnography, while secondary outcomes included subjective sleep quality and daytime sleepiness measured using validated questionnaires, including the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Results: Twenty-one studies involving 1,255 women with PCOS and 1,523 controls were included. Women with PCOS had a significantly higher apnea-hypopnea index compared to controls (SMD = 1.030, 95% CI: 0.408 to 1.653, Conclusion: This study highlights significant differences in some sleep-disordered breathing indices, sleep structure, and objective sleep quality measures between women with PCOS and control groups. Subjective sleep measures demonstrated more pronounced differences than some objective assessments, suggesting a greater impact on perceived sleep disturbances.
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.