Evidence Hub

Improving the accuracy and efficacy of diagnosing polycystic ovary syndrome by integrating metabolomics with clinical characteristics: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Ni CM, Huang WL, Jiang YM, Xu J, Duan R, Zhu YL, Zhu XP, Fan XM et al.

Trials, 2020

276 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Background: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a complex endocrine syndrome with poorly understood mechanisms. To provide patients with PCOS with individualized therapy, it is critical to precisely diagnose the phenotypes of the disease. However, the criteria for diagnosing the different phenotypes are mostly based on symptoms, physical examination and laboratory results. This study aims to compare the accuracy and efficacy of diagnosing PCOS by integrating metabolomic markers with common clinical characteristics.

Methods: This is a prospective, multicenter, analyst-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Participants will be grouped into (1) people without PCOS (healthy control group), (2) patients diagnosed with PCOS based on clinical indices (experimental group 1), and (3) patients diagnosed with PCOS based on metabolomic indices (experimental group 2). A total of 276 participants, including 60 healthy people and 216 patients with PCOS, will be recruited. The 216 patients with PCOS will be randomly assigned to the two experimental groups in a 1:1 ratio, and each group will receive a different 6-month treatment. The primary outcome for the experimental groups will be the effect of PCOS treatment.

Discussion: The results of this trial should help to determine whether using metabolomic indices is more accurate and effective than using clinical characteristics in diagnosing the phenotypes of PCOS. The results could provide a solid foundation for the accurate diagnosis of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 276 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free