The evolutionary basis of elevated testosterone in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: an overview of systematic reviews of the evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) exhibits high prevalence and heritability despite causing negative impacts on fertility and fecundity. Previous hypotheses have postulated that some PCOS-associated traits, especially above-average levels of testosterone, were associated with benefits in ancestral environments. As such, PCOS would represent, in part, a maladaptive extreme of adaptations related to relatively high testosterone. To evaluate this hypothesis, we conducted a series of systematic literature reviews on the associations of testosterone levels, and prenatal testosterone metrics, with measures of strength, robustness, muscularity, and athleticism in females. We also systematically reviewed the literature on associations of testosterone with dominance in females and reviewed archaeological evidence concerning female strength and muscularity and its correlates. The main findings were fivefold: (1) elevated testosterone levels were generally associated with higher strength, muscularity and athleticism in females; (2) females with PCOS showed notable evidence of increased strength, muscularity, and athleticism compared to controls; (3) females with higher testosterone levels exhibited clear evidence of high dominance, (4) despite evidence that higher testosterone is linked with higher bone mineral density in healthy females, PCOS was not clearly associated with this phenotype; and (5) archaeological evidence from osteology, and data from some current small-scale societies, indicated that females often exhibit substantial levels of muscularity. Overall, the hypothesis that relatively high levels of testosterone are associated with benefits to females in some contexts was largely supported. These results provide evidence for the "maladaptive extremes of adaptation" model, with implications for treatment of females with PCOS and for future research.
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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".