Cited by 73Ovarian function and disordersEndometriosis Research and TreatmentGenetic and Kidney Cyst Diseases

Comparison of clinical and hormonal characteristics among four phenotypes of polycystic ovary syndrome based on the rotterdam criteria

Jamil, Avin S., Alalaf, Shahla K., Al-Tawil, Namir G., Al-Shawaf, Talha·2016·Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Abstract

Purpose Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) is the most common endocrine disturbances in women and is divided into different phenotypes. The aim of study is to compare the clinical and hormonal parameters among the four phenotypes of PCOS based on the Rotterdam criteria and with control group.Methods Women with PCOS (n = 263) confirmed based on the Rotterdam criteria and 263 women with no evidence of PCOS were recruited as controls using observational case-control study. Evaluation of clinical and hormonal parameters, and differences in anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) were compared between four phenotypes of PCOS and controls.Results Women with phenotype A (olig-anovulation (O) + hyperandrogenism (H) + polycystic ovary morphology (P)) had significantly larger waist than phenotype D (O + P) and higher body mass index than phenotype C (H + P). The LH/FSH ratio was significantly higher in phenotype A than phenotype D and controls along with significantly higher serum total testosterone levels in phenotype A compared to the phenotype B (O + H), C, D, and controls. AMH was significantly higher with phenotype A, C, and D than in women phenotype B and controls.Conclusions The highest AMH levels were found in phenotype A. Phenotype B similar to controls had significantly low AMH compared to other three PCOS phenotypes. Women in the phenotypes D and controls showed significantly lower levels of LH/FSH ratio, total testosterone, and free androgen index, and higher levels of FSH and SHBG compared with phenotype A (P < 0.001). In logistic regression analysis, AMH and LH were predictors for PCOS.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00404-015-3889-5

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jamil, A. S., Alalaf, S. K., Al-Tawil, N. G., & Al-Shawaf, T.
Affiliations
Hawler Medical University (IQ)
Corresponding author
Jamil, Avin S.
Venue
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
Published
2015-09-25
Volume
293
Issue
2
Pages
447-456
ISSN
  • 0003-9128 (ISSN-L)
  • 0932-0067
  • 1432-0711
OpenAlex
W1702870999
Cited by
73
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7
FWCI
5.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian function and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and Kidney Cyst Diseases
Keywords
polycystic ovary syndrome, PCOS phenotypes, Rotterdam criteria, anti-Müllerian hormone, LH/FSH ratio, total testosterone, free androgen index, sex hormone-binding globulin, oligoanovulation, hyperandrogenism, body mass index, waist circumference
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anovulation, Female, Humans, Ovary, Phenotype, Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, Body Mass Index, Case-Control Studies, Hyperandrogenism, Anti-Mullerian Hormone, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review