Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 486

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Thirty-seven candidate genes for polycystic ovary syndrome: Strongest evidence for linkage is with follistatin

Open access
Urbanek, Margrit, Legro, Richard S., Driscoll, Deborah A., Azziz, Ricardo, Ehrmann, David A., Norman, Robert J., Strauss, Jerome F., Spielman, Richard S., Dunaif, Andrea·1999·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common endocrine disorder of women, characterized by hyperandrogenism and chronic anovulation. It is a leading cause of female infertility and is associated with polycystic ovaries, hirsutism, obesity, and insulin resistance. We tested a carefully chosen collection of 37 candidate genes for linkage and association with PCOS or hyperandrogenemia in data from 150 families. The strongest evidence for linkage was with the follistatin gene, for which affected sisters showed increased identity by descent (72%; χ 2 = 12.97; nominal P = 3.2 × 10 −4 ). After correction for multiple testing (33 tests), the follistatin findings were still highly significant ( P c = 0.01). Although the linkage results for CYP11A were also nominally significant ( P = 0.02), they were no longer significant after correction. In 11 candidate gene regions, at least one allele showed nominally significant evidence for population association with PCOS in the transmission/disequilibrium test (χ 2 ≥ 3.84; nominal P < 0.05). The strongest effect in the transmission/disequilibrium test was observed in the INSR region ( D19S884 ; allele 5; χ 2 = 8.53) but was not significant after correction. Our study shows how a systematic screen of candidate genes can provide strong evidence for genetic linkage in complex diseases and can identify those genes that should have high (or low) priority for further study.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.96.15.8573

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 486

Metadata

Authors
Urbanek, M., Legro, R. S., Driscoll, D. A., Azziz, R., Ehrmann, D. A., Norman, R. J., Strauss, J. F., Spielman, R. S., & Dunaif, A.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1999-07-20
Volume
96
Issue
15
Pages
8573-8578
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1977681402
Cited by
486
References
7
FWCI
30.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Thirty-seven candidate genes for polycystic ovary syndrome: Strongest evidence for linkage is with follistatin. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.96.15.8573
The paper
Urbanek, M., Legro, R. S., Driscoll, D. A., Azziz, R., Ehrmann, D. A., Norman, R. J., Strauss, J. F., Spielman, R. S., & Dunaif, A. (1999). Thirty-seven candidate genes for polycystic ovary syndrome: Strongest evidence for linkage is with follistatin. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.15.8573

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.