Skip Navigation



Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on November 12, 2009

Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/dep399
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF )
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by March, W. A.
Right arrow Articles by Davies, M. J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by March, W. A.
Right arrow Articles by Davies, M. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome in a community sample assessed under contrasting diagnostic criteria

Wendy A. March1,2, Vivienne M. Moore2, Kristyn J. Willson1, David I.W. Phillips3, Robert J. Norman1 and Michael J. Davies1,4

1 Discipline of Obstetrics/Gynaecology, Robinson Institute, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia 2 Discipline of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia 3 Medical Research Council, Epidemiology Resource Centre and Developmental Origins of Health and Disease Division, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK

4 Correspondence address. E-mail: michael.davies{at}adelaide.edu.au

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is considered to be the most common endocrine disorder in women of reproductive age, yet debate over appropriate diagnostic criteria and design limitations with sampling methodology have left some doubt as to the actual prevalence in the community. The objective of this study was to create a representative prevalence estimate of PCOS in the community under the National Institutes of Health (NIH) criteria and the more recent Rotterdam consensus criteria and Androgen Excess Society (AES) criteria.

METHODS: A retrospective birth cohort study was carried out in which 728 women born during 1973–1975 in a single maternity hospital were traced and interviewed in adulthood (age = 27–34 year; n = 728). Symptoms of PCOS (hyperandrogenism, menstrual dysfunction and polycystic ovaries) were identified by examination and the presence of polycystic ovaries in those that did not consent to the ultrasound were imputed.

RESULTS: The estimated prevalence of PCOS in this birth cohort using the NIH criteria was 8.7 ± 2.0% (with no need for imputation). Under the Rotterdam criteria, the prevalence was 11.9 ± 2.4% which increased to 17.8 ± 2.8% when imputed data were included. Under the AES recommendations, PCOS prevalence was 10.2 ± 2.2%, and 12.0 ± 2.4% with the imputed data. Of the women with PCOS, 68–69% did not have a pre-existing diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS: The Rotterdam and AES prevalence estimates were up to twice that obtained with the NIH criteria in this, as well other prevalence studies. In addition, this study also draws attention to the issue of many women with PCOS in the community remaining undiagnosed.

Key words: endocrine disorder/polycystic ovary syndrome/hirsutism/menstrual irregularity/Rotterdam criteria

Submitted on August 17, 2009; resubmitted on October 13, 2009; accepted on October 15, 2009.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.