Dysglycemia, Not Altered Sex Steroid Hormones, Affects Cognitive Function in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Context Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a complex endocrine condition characterized by multiple reproductive and metabolic abnormalities. Because individual reproductive and metabolic abnormalities modulate working memory in the general population, there is growing interest in whether cognitive function is dually and negatively affected in PCOS. Objective To examine the association of reproductive and metabolic features with cognitive function in women with and without PCOS. Design An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted at an academic clinical research center in North America between 2006 and 2009. Common tests of working memory (i.e., manual dexterity, perceptual speed, and visuospatial ability) were performed by women with PCOS (n = 40) and control subjects (n = 40). Markers of sex steroid hormones, ovulatory function, and cardiometabolic health were also assessed. Results Reduced visuospatial ability was observed in women with PCOS compared with control subjects (P < 0.01). Reduced visuospatial ability was linked to higher levels of hemoglobin A1c in the entire study cohort, independent of body mass index or PCOS status. No associations were observed between visuospatial ability and reproductive features, after controlling for confounding variables. Conclusion Our findings support a role for glycemic control, and not PCOS per se, in cognitive dysfunction in women of reproductive age. Additional studies are needed to understand the short- and long-term effects of dysglycemia on brain health in women with PCOS, given their increased propensity for metabolic comorbidities, compared with control subjects.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".