Cited by 9Ovarian function and disordersDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsNutritional Studies and Diet

Suboptimal dietary intake is associated with cardiometabolic risk factors in women with polycystic ovary syndrome

Hart, Kathryn, Barr, Suzanne, Reeves, Sue, Sharp, Kay, Jeanes, Yvonne·2016·Nutrition & Dietetics

Abstract

Aim: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most prevalent endocrine disorder in women and confers a substantial health burden. It is important to explore modifiable extrinsic factors that contribute to disease risk. The aim of the present study was to compare the dietary intake, physical activity and physiological characteristics of women with PCOS with those of controls to identify lifestyle behaviours associated with known cardiometabolic risk factors. Methods: A seven‐day food and activity diary was completed and anthropometric and biomarkers of type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease risk were measured in 38 women with PCOS, and 30 controls, matched for age and body mass index. Results: Similar energy intakes and activity levels were observed between groups. Percentage energy intakes from total, saturated and monounsaturated fats were significantly higher (P = 0.008, P = 0.012 and P = 0.003, respectively) and % energy from carbohydrate was significantly lower (P < 0.001) in participants with PCOS compared with controls (P < 0.001). Insulin levels, two hours after a glucose challenge, were significantly higher in PCOS participants compared with controls (P = 0.029). Increased dietary glycaemic index appeared to be associated with a more negative biochemical profile in women with PCOS compared to controls, being significantly associated with an increased waist circumference and LDL‐cholesterol and decreased HDL‐cholesterol. Conclusions: The present study has identified suboptimal dietary patterns in women with PCOS, and highlighted dietary factors associated with cardiometabolic risk factors that warrant monitoring in both lean and obese women with PCOS.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1747-0080.12188

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hart, K., Barr, S., Reeves, S., Sharp, K., & Jeanes, Y.
Affiliations
  • University of Surrey (GB)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • University of Roehampton (GB)
Corresponding author
Jeanes, Yvonne
Venue
Nutrition & Dietetics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-07-07
Volume
73
Issue
2
Pages
177-183
ISSN
  • 1446-6368 (ISSN-L)
  • 1747-0080
OpenAlex
W2170631235
Cited by
9
References
5
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nutrition & Dietetics (publishedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Roehampton
  • University of Surrey
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian function and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
Keywords
polycystic ovary syndrome, dietary intake, cardiometabolic risk factors, dietary fat, carbohydrate intake, glycemic index, insulin, waist circumference, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, type 2 diabetes risk, cardiovascular risk, physical activity, women

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