Comparing the Effects of Oral Contraceptives Containing Levonorgestrel With Products Containing Antiandrogenic Progestins on Clinical, Hormonal, and Metabolic Parameters and Quality of Life in Women With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral contraceptives (OCs) have been used as a first-line option for medical treatment in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Despite theoretical superiority of products containing antiandrogenic progestins compared to OCs containing levonorgestrel (LNG), the clinical advantage of these compounds remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of OCs containing LNG with products containing antiandrogenic progestins including cyproterone acetate, drospirenone, and desogestrel on clinical, hormonal, and metabolic parameters and quality of life in women with PCOS. METHODS: We conducted a 6-arm crossover randomized controlled trial with each arm including OCs containing LNG and one of those 3 OCs containing antiandrogenic progestins. The anthropometric and clinical manifestations and hormonal and biochemical parameters of participants were assessed at 6 time points including baseline, after washout period, and 3 and 6 months after intervention. RESULTS: The study is ongoing and follow-up of recruited women will continue until 2018. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide scientific evidence on comparability of OCs with the various progesterones that will assist in decision making taking into account cost effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials IRCT201702071281N2; http://www.irct.ir/searchresult.php? keyword=&id=1281&number=2&prt=12869&total=10&m=1 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6tSP8FNWo).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".