Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42643546›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in endocrinology2026

From

Maurizio Nordio, Daniele Barbaro, Valdemaro Pavacci

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Maurizio NordioThe Experts' Group On Inositol In Basic and Clinical Research, and on PMOS (EGOI-PCOS/PMOS), Rome, Italy.
Daniele BarbaroThe Experts' Group On Inositol In Basic and Clinical Research, and on PMOS (EGOI-PCOS/PMOS), Rome, Italy.
Valdemaro PavacciUniCamillus - Saint Camillus International University of Health Sciences, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The proposed renaming of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) as polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS) is an important step toward recognizing the systemic endocrine-metabolic nature of a condition historically misrepresented by ovarian cystic morphology. However, the persistence of the word ovarian remains conceptually limiting and reinforces the perception of a female-exclusive disorder. Published reports have provocatively proposed a male PCOS equivalent, particularly in male relatives of women with PCOS. We posit that those observations may be better conceptualized as male Endocrine-Metabolic Syndrome (male EMS), rather than male PCOS, hoping to offer a more coherent depiction of this clinical condition. In this perspective,

Indexed as

Metabolic SyndromePolycystic Ovary SyndromeFemaleHumansInsulin ResistanceMaleandrogenetic alopeciacardiometabolic riskEMSinsulin resistancemale endocrine-metabolic syndromemale PCOS equivalentPMOS

Identifiers

PMID42643546
PMCPMC13503339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.