ArticleEndocrine connections2026
A multi-model study of the association between BMI and AMH in Chinese women.
Article in Endocrine connections, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether body mass index (BMI) is associated with anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) in Chinese women and whether PCOS, age, or testosterone modifies this association.
methodsWe analyzed 670 women (20-39 years) from Hangzhou Women's Hospital. Primary analyses included linear regression and generalized additive models (GAMs) with thin-plate splines, and multi-group structural equation modeling to test PCOS effect modification. Secondary analyses included interaction tests and Chinese BMI category comparisons. All models were adjusted for age, follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, and testosterone.
resultsBMI showed no significant linear association with log-AMH (β = 0.008; adjusted R2 = 0.398). GAMs confirmed a near-linear relationship without threshold effects. However, underweight women (BMI < 18.5 kg/m2) had significantly lower log-AMH than normal-weight women (β = -0.14, P = 0.036), with no significant differences for overweight or obese categories. PCOS did not modify the BMI-AMH association.
conclusionBMI is not a clinically meaningful predictor of ovarian reserve as a continuous variable. Lower AMH in underweight women highlights a subgroup warranting attention in reproductive assessments, while PCOS status does not influence this relationship.
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.