The Association between Vitamin D and Anti-Müllerian Hormone: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accumulating evidence from animal and human studies indicates a role for vitamin D in female reproductive physiology, and numerous clinical studies have suggested its potential benefit for various aspects of human reproduction. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) is an ovarian biomarker that plays an important role in folliculogenesis. It is the most sensitive ovarian reserve marker and is widely used clinically in reproductive medicine. While initial studies have suggested that vitamin D may be associated with ovarian reserve markers, including AMH, evidence has been conflicting. Currently, there is considerable debate in the field whether vitamin D has the capacity to influence ovarian reserve, as indicated by the AMH level. The current systematic review aims to evaluate and summarize the available evidence regarding the relationship between vitamin D and AMH. In total, 18 observational studies and 6 interventional studies were included in this systematic review. Cross-sectional studies have reported largely discrepant findings regarding an association between serum vitamin D and AMH levels, which are likely due to the heterogeneity in study populations, as well as the apparently complex relationship that may exist between vitamin D and AMH. However, meta-analysis of interventional studies performed herein that examined the effects of vitamin D supplementation on serum AMH levels indicates a cause-effect relationship between vitamin D and AMH, the direction of which appears to depend on a woman’s ovulatory status. Serum AMH was significantly decreased following vitamin D supplementation in polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) women (standardized mean difference (SMD) −0.53, 95% CI −0.91 to −0.15, p < 0.007), while it was significantly increased following vitamin D supplementation in ovulatory women without PCOS (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.80, p = 0.003). In conclusion, the results of this systematic review demonstrate that the relationship between vitamin D and AMH is a complex one, and large, randomized trials of vitamin D supplementation focusing on different vitamin D status ranges are necessary to gain more insight into the nature of this relationship and the potential benefit of vitamin D to female reproduction in general.
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 | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".