Cited by 17Ovarian function and disordersNutritional Studies and DietFood composition and properties

Lower Fiber Consumption in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Open access
Leung, Wing Ting, Tang, Zhijing, Feng, Yuanyuan, Guan, Haiyun, Huang, Zengshu, Zhang, Wei·2022·Nutrients

Abstract

Polycystic ovary syndrome is a common endocrine disorder associated with metabolic abnormalities and gut microbiota dysbiosis. The deficiency of dietary fiber, a crucial nutrient in the daily diet, is also associated with a wide range of metabolic and reproductive abnormalities, as well as an altered gut microbial ecosystem. This study is a meta-analysis to summarize the available evidence on the dietary fiber intake level in PCOS patients. Databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for observational studies, and 13 studies were finally included. The pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) of daily dietary fiber intake and total energy intake were calculated using the random-effects model. The pooled result (12 studies) on absolute dietary fiber intake showed that while there was no significant difference in the total energy intake [−0.17 (−0.44, 0.09), p = 0.208], the dietary fiber intake was significantly lower in PCOS women than those of controls [−0.32 (−0.50, −0.14), p < 0.001]. However, significant heterogeneity was detected across the studies (I2 = 65.6%, p = 0.001). Meta-regression suggested that geographic region and dietary assessment method may confer borderline significance of influence on the heterogeneity. The pooled result (two studies) on dietary fiber intake which adjusted for total energy intake, however, showed no significant difference [−2.11 (−4.77, 0.56), p = 0.122]. In subgroup analyses based on absolute dietary fiber intake, a lower dietary fiber intake in PCOS was observed in studies conducted in Asia, adopted food diary or records or food recall as the dietary assessment method, had a case–control study design, or used Rotterdam criteria for PCOS diagnosis. The difference in SMD was still significant in the adult subgroup or in studies matched or unmatched for age.

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 · 10.3390/nu14245285

Cites

74 of 74 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?

  • Women with PCOS eat less dietary fiber than controls, with a pooled standardized mean difference of -0.32 (p < 0.001) in daily fiber intake across 13 studies.

    “A pooling of 13 studies led to a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.32 (p < 0.001) in daily fiber intake of PCOS patients compared to controls, which underlines this in difficulties across different geographical regions [123].”

    From Nutritional and herbal interventions for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS): a comprehensive review of dietary approaches, macronutrient impact, and herbal medicine in management (2025) · cites this paper as [123]

    The Results (§3.2) report significantly lower daily fiber intake in women with PCOS, with SMD −0.32 and p < 0.001, but that estimate pooled unadjusted data from 12 studies, not 13. The paper included 13 studies overall; its geographic subgroup analysis (§3.3) found a significant difference in Asia but not in the other continents examined. (LLM, conf=0.94)

    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
Leung, W. T., Tang, Z., Feng, Y., Guan, H., Huang, Z., & Zhang, W.
Affiliations
  • Fudan University (CN)
  • Department of Reproductive Endocrinology, Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200011, China
Corresponding author
Zhang, Wei
Venue
Nutrients
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-12-12
Volume
14
Issue
24
Pages
5285
ISSN
2072-6643 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4312126163
Cited by
17
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nutrients (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China (81771587)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian function and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
Keywords
polycystic ovary syndrome, dietary fiber intake, women, energy intake, gut dysbiosis, metabolic abnormalities, reproductive abnormalities, dietary assessment, Rotterdam criteria
MeSH terms
Adult, Diet, Dietary Fiber, Female, Humans, Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, Case-Control Studies, Ecosystem

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