Effect of melatonin supplementation on cardiometabolic risk factors, oxidative stress and hormonal profile in PCOS patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate whether melatonin supplementation can enhance cardiometabolic risk factors, reduce oxidative stress, and improve hormonal and pregnancy-related factors in patients with PCOS. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for articles published in English from inception to March 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of melatonin for patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). We performed a meta-analysis using a random-effects model and calculated the standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: = 00.00%) and has no effect on FBS, insulin, HOMA-IR, TC, TG, HDL, LDL, MDA, hs-CRP, mFG, SHBG, total testosterone, and pregnancy rate in patients with PCOS compare to controls. The included trials did not report any adverse events. CONCLUSION: Melatonin is a potential antioxidant that may prevent damage from oxidative stress in patients with PCOS. However, the clear effect of melatonin supplementation on cardiometabolic risk factors, hormonal outcomes, and pregnancy-related outcomes needs to be evaluated further in large populations and long-term RCTs.
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 | 0.105 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.029 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".