Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,712

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Prevalence and Features of the Polycystic Ovary Syndrome in an Unselected Population

Open access
Azziz, Ricardo, Woods, Keslie S., Reyna, Rosario, Key, Timothy J., Knochenhauer, Eric S., Yildiz, Bulent O.·2004·The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
DOI 10.1210/jc.2003-032046
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Notwithstanding the potential public health impact of the polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), estimates regarding its prevalence are limited and unclear. Between July 1998 and October 1999, 400 unselected consecutive premenopausal women (18-45 yr of age) seeking a preemployment physical at the University of Alabama at Birmingham were studied (223 Black, 166 White, and 11 of other races). Evaluation included a history and physical examination, a modified Ferriman-Gallwey hirsutism score, and serum screening for hyperandrogenemia, hyperprolactinemia, and 21-hydroxylase-deficient nonclassical adrenal hyperplasia. PCOS was diagnosed by the presence of the following: 1) oligoovulation, 2) hyperandrogenemia and/or hirsutism (modified Ferriman-Gallwey score > or = 6), and 3) the exclusion of related disorders. Confirmed PCOS was established in those individuals whose evaluation was complete and indicative of PCOS, and possible PCOS was established when the hormonal evaluation was not complete or was unavailable, but the clinical phenotype was otherwise suggestive of the disorder. The individual probability of PCOS in women with possible PCOS was assigned a weight based on the findings in similar subjects whose evaluation was complete, and the total number of PCOS cases arising from these individuals was calculated (i.e. individual probability of PCOS x total number of subjects in the group). The cumulative prevalence of PCOS in our population was 6.6% (26.5 of 400), including 15 subjects among the 347 women completing their evaluation and a calculated prevalence of 11.5 subjects among the remainder. The prevalence rates of PCOS for Black and White women were 8.0 and 4.8%, respectively, not significantly different. These data from a large representative unselected population support the concept that PCOS is the most common endocrine abnormality of reproductive-aged women in the United States.

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 · 10.1210/jc.2003-032046

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Azziz, R., Woods, K. S., Reyna, R., Key, T. J., Knochenhauer, E. S., & Yildiz, B. O.
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
Publisher
The Endocrine Society
Published
2004-06
Volume
89
Issue
6
Pages
2745-2749
ISSN
  • 0021-972X (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-7197
DOI
10.1210/jc.2003-032046
OpenAlex
W2096887626
Cited by
2,712
References
4
FWCI
61.78
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

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.