Cited by 32Ovarian function and disordersEndometriosis Research and TreatmentReproductive Health and Contraception

Combined oral contraceptive pill compared with no medical treatment in the management of polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review

Open access
Forslund, Maria, Melin, Johanna, Alesi, Simon, Piltonen, Terhi, Romualdi, Daniela, Tay, Chau Thien, Witchel, Selma, Pena, Alexia +2 more·2023·Clinical Endocrinology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: As part of the update of the International Evidence-Based Guidelines for the Assessment and Management of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), a systematic review was performed to inform evidence-based recommendations. DESIGN: Systematic review. Only randomised controlled trial were included. PATIENTS: Women with PCOS; the use of combined oral contraceptive pills (COCP) was compared with no medical treatment. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes were designed in collaboration with clinical experts, researchers, and consumers. Critical outcomes included hirsutism, irregular cycles, quality of life, body mass index (BMI), and weight. RESULTS: 1660 publications were identified, but only four studies were included. No studies could be combined for meta-analysis. COCP treatment improved cycle regularity compared with no medical treatment (100% vs. 0%, with low certainty of evidence). COCP showed no difference in improvement of hirsutism or BMI compared with placebo or lifestyle; a lower weight after COCP compared with no treatment (mean difference [MD] -8.0 (95% confidence interval, CI -11.67); -4.33 kg); and improvement in quality of life (MD 1.2 [95% CI 0.96]; 1.44), but these results were all very low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSION: Results show that COCP benefit cycle regulation, but other benefits or potential adverse effects were only identified with very low certainty of evidence. The COCP is frontline medical treatment in PCOS, but this is still based on established efficacy in the broader general population. Our results show that research in PCOS is seriously lacking and should be prioritised to capture core reproductive, metabolic and psychological outcomes important in PCOS.

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 · 10.1111/cen.14913

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • A recent systematic review by our group found COCP to be effective in improving menstrual cyclicity and hirsutism in PCOS, with limited evidence for hirsutism.

    “A recent systematic review by our group found COCP to be effective in improving menstrual cyclicity and hirsutism in PCOS, with limited evidence for hirsutism (13).”

    From Metformin and Combined Oral Contraceptive Pills in the Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2024) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Results section reports improved cycle regularity with COCP compared with no treatment, with low certainty of evidence. It does not establish improved hirsutism: the Clinical and biochemical hyperandrogenism results report no difference from placebo or lifestyle, with very low certainty of evidence. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Forslund, M., Melin, J., Alesi, S., Piltonen, T., Romualdi, D., Tay, C. T., Witchel, S., Pena, A., Mousa, A., & Teede, H.
Affiliations
  • Monash University (AU)
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • Oulu University Hospital (FI)
  • Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IT)
  • Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Discipline of Paedriatics The University of Adelaide and Robinson Research Institute North Adelaide Australia
  • Monash Health (AU)
Corresponding author
Forslund, Maria
Venue
Clinical Endocrinology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-03-27
Volume
99
Issue
1
Pages
79-91
ISSN
  • 0300-0664 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2265
OpenAlex
W4327898727
Cited by
32
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7
FWCI
1.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Endocrinology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • Finska Läkaresällskapet
  • Orionin Tutkimussäätiö
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian function and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
Keywords
polycystic ovary syndrome, combined oral contraceptives, hirsutism, quality of life, body mass index, weight loss, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Contraceptives, Oral, Combined, Female, Hirsutism, Humans, Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, Quality of Life

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