ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Evaluation of the incidence of congenital uterine anomalies in polycystic ovarian syndrome: tertiary center experience.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Is polycystic ovary syndrome associated with uterine malformations? A systematic review using Bradford Hill's causality framework.Human reproduction open · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The primary aim of the study was to compare the incidence of congenital uterine anomalies in polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) patients with the control group. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at a tertiary center between January 2018 and January 2024. The study cohort included 297 patients, comprising 99 women with PCOS (PCOS group, 33.3%) and 198 healthy women whose partners had male factor infertility (control group, 66.7%). The uterine cavity was evaluated using hysterosalpingography (HSG) images according to the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) Müllerian anomalies classification guidelines. Demographic characteristics, physical examination findings, laboratory results, and HSG findings of the groups were compared. Analyses were performed with SPSS version 26.0. Variables that did not show a normal distribution were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test. The chi-squared test and Fisher exact test were used to analyze categorical data. An inter-rater reliability analysis (Cohen's kappa) was performed for HSG findings. The results were reported with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The Results: Of the whole study cohort, 7.7% had congenital uterine anomalies (CUAs) according to the ASRM criteria and 4.7% had CUAs according to the ESHRE/ESGE classification. CUAs were 5.7 times higher in the PCOS group than in the control group according to the ASRM criteria and 5.5 times higher in the PCOS group than the control group according to the ESHRE/ESGE classification system (17.2% vs. 3%, Conclusion: We found that the frequency of CUA was higher among PCOS patients. Prospective studies are needed to examine anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), serum sex steroids, and pregnancy complications in more detail to clarify pathophysiology and clinical implications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.