Polycystic ovary syndrome in women is associated with longer anogenital distance, a new potential biomaker for PCOS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Fetal androgen exposure plays a pivotal role in Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) development and may result in elevated Anogenital distance (AGD). This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the clinical link between PCOS and AGD. Methods A literature search was performed across various databases to identify studies evaluating AGD in adults with PCOS and without, regardless of language, up to December 2024. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) scoring system. Random-effects models were utilized to determine mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in cases of high heterogeneity. This meta-analysis encompassed 4 studies involving a total of 837 participants. Results The pooled analysis found a noteworthy increase of the AGD-ac and AGD-af in PCOS patient compared with the control groups, with an overall MD of AGD-ac = 5.23, 95% CI (2.60, 7.85), P-value < 0.0001, I 2 = 57%, and with an overall MD of AGD-af = 2.19, 95% CI (0.04, 4.35), P-value = 0.05, I 2 = 89%. Conclusion The meta-analysis results indicated that women diagnosed with PCOS exhibit elongated AGD. This potential association between AGD and PCOS could serve as a novel clinical marker for the diagnosis of PCOS. Fetal androgen exposure may play a role in the pathogenesis of 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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".