PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT OF POLYCYSTIC OVARY SYNDROME (PCOS) ON REPRODUCTIVE-AGED WOMEN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common endocrine disorder affecting reproductive-aged women and is frequently associated with adverse psychological outcomes. While its metabolic and reproductive consequences are well-documented, the psychological burden of PCOS remains underexplored. Existing studies suggest elevated rates of depression, anxiety, and reduced quality of life, but findings are fragmented and vary by population and methodology, underscoring the need for a comprehensive synthesis. Objective: This systematic review aims to evaluate the psychological impact of PCOS on reproductive-aged women, specifically examining the prevalence and severity of depression, anxiety, body image dissatisfaction, and impaired quality of life. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between 2018 and 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed observational studies involving women aged 15–49 years with a clinical diagnosis of PCOS and reporting relevant psychological outcomes. Studies were screened and selected independently by two reviewers. Data extraction followed a standardized format, and methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: Eight studies involving 5,842 women met the inclusion criteria. All studies reported significantly higher levels of depression, anxiety, or psychological distress in women with PCOS compared to controls (p < 0.05). Body image dissatisfaction and decreased health-related quality of life were also consistently observed. While the included studies were generally of moderate to high quality, heterogeneity in study designs limited statistical synthesis. Conclusion: PCOS is strongly associated with adverse psychological outcomes, emphasizing the importance of integrated care models that address both physical and mental health. Although current evidence is robust, further longitudinal and interventional research is necessary to confirm causal pathways and inform comprehensive management strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".