The Gut Microbiome in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and Its Association with Metabolic Traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Despite the gut microbiome being widely studied in metabolic diseases, its role in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) has been scarcely investigated. OBJECTIVE: Compare the gut microbiome in late fertile age women with and without PCOS and investigate whether changes in the gut microbiome correlate with PCOS-related metabolic parameters. DESIGN: Prospective, case-control study using the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966. SETTING: General community. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 102 PCOS women and 201 age- and body mass index (BMI)-matched non-PCOS control women. Clinical and biochemical characteristics of the participants were assessed at ages 31 and 46 and analyzed in the context of gut microbiome data at the age of 46. INTERVENTION: (s): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Bacterial diversity, relative abundance, and correlations with PCOS-related metabolic measures. RESULTS: Bacterial diversity indices did not differ significantly between PCOS and controls (Shannon diversity P = .979, unweighted UniFrac P = .175). Four genera whose balance helps to differentiate between PCOS and non-PCOS were identified. In the whole cohort, the abundance of 2 genera from Clostridiales, Ruminococcaceae UCG-002, and Clostridiales Family XIII AD3011 group, were correlated with several PCOS-related markers. Prediabetic PCOS women had significantly lower alpha diversity (Shannon diversity P = .018) and markedly increased abundance of genus Dorea (false discovery rate = 0.03) compared with women with normal glucose tolerance. CONCLUSION: PCOS and non-PCOS women at late fertile age with similar BMI do not significantly differ in their gut microbial profiles. However, there are significant microbial changes in PCOS individuals depending on their metabolic health.
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 | 0.001 | 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".