Experiences of women living with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A pilot case-control, single-cycle, daily Menstrual Cycle Diary study during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) affects many people and is often distressing. Much medical literature about diagnosis and treatment exists, but little is known about PCOS menstrual cycle-related experiences except that cycles tend to be far-apart and unpredictable. Our purpose was to examine the menstrual cycle and daily life experiences in those with PCOS having approximately month-apart cycles compared with age and BMI-matched cohort controls using data from the Menstruation & Ovulation Study 2 (MOS2) during the first 1.5 years of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We hypothesized that those with PCOS would experience lower self-worth and more negative moods. This is a single-cycle prospective case-control study in community-dwelling women ages 19-35 years. Eight reported physician-diagnosed PCOS and were matched (1:3 ratio) with controls by age (within .6 years) and BMI (within .19 BMI units). Experiences were recorded daily (Menstrual Cycle Diary©, Diary). All kept daily morning temperatures to assess luteal phase lengths by the validated Quantitative Basal Temperature© analysis method. From 112 in MOS2, 32 women were compared: eight with PCOS versus 24 controls. Demographic, socioeconomic, comorbidities and lifestyle variables were not different between the two groups. Cycle lengths were similar in PCOS and controls (one PCOS and control each had oligomenorrhea; most lengths were 21-35 days, P = .593). Unexpectedly, luteal phase lengths were also similar between PCOS and controls (P = .167); anovulation occurred in 5 with PCOS, and in 9 controls. There were no significant Diary differences between the two groups except for greater "outside stress" in the PCOS group (P = .020). In contrast to our hypotheses, there were no significant differences in feelings of self-worth, anxiety nor depression. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was a stressful time for women. MOS2 captured granular menstrual cycles, ovulation and daily experiences in women with PCOS compared with age- and BMI-matched controls. These pilot data in women with milder PCOS are the first of more research required to understand the daily experiences in those living with PCOS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".