Menstrual pattern in polycystic ovary syndrome and hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis immaturity in adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo analyze differences in the menstrual pattern, age at menarche, and body mass index (BMI) in adolescents with Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Ovarian (HPO) axis immaturity and Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Virtual Health Library, Scopus databases were searched using combinations of descriptors. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. For data analysis, the results were grouped into PCOS group and NPCOS group (HPO axis immaturity). We performed a meta-analysis of raw data and the inverse variance method, employing the standardized mean difference, of the age at menarche and BMI of adolescents.ResultsParticipants totaled 1,718 from nine selected studies. The meta-analysis showed that the PCOS group had a higher BMI than the NPCOS group (SMD 0.334; CI95% 0.073 - 0.595; p = .012). The degree of heterogeneity of the studies was approximately 40%. No significant difference in age at menarche (SMD - 0.027; CI95% -0.227 - 0.172; p = 0.790) and menstrual patterns was found, but amenorrhea was described only in adolescents with PCOS.ConclusionsThe main characteristic in menstrual pattern that differentiated PCOS patients from girls with HPO axis immaturity was amenorrhea. Also, the BMI of PCOS patients was nearly one third higher than that of adolescents with HPO axis immaturity.
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 | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".