Skip to main content
. 2020 Feb 11;2020(2):CD001122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001122.pub5

Palomba 2004.

Methods Randomised double‐blind study conducted in Italy
Timing: October 2001 to December 2002
Participants 120 women; mean age of metformin group was 26.8 ± 2.2 and in LOD group 27.5 ± 2.4 years
Inclusion: Overweight (BMI 25 ‐ 30 kg/m2) women with PCOS, clomiphene‐resistant
Exclusion: Age < 22 or > 34 years; hypothyroidism, hyperprolactinaemia, Cushings syndrome, nonclassical congenital adrenal hyperplasia, and current or previous (within 6 months) use of oral contraceptives, glucocorticoids, antiandrogens, ovulation induction agents, antidiabetic or anti‐obesity drugs, or other hormonal drugs; neoplasms, metabolic, hepatic, or cardiovascular disorder or other concurrent medical illness; women who were intending to start a diet or a specific programme of physical activity; having organic pelvic disease, previous pelvic surgery, suspected peritoneal factor infertility , and tubal or male infertility
Interventions Diagnostic laparoscopy followed by metformin cloridrate 850 mg twice daily. If anovulatory at 6 months clomiphene citrate 150 mg daily from Day 3 ‐ 7 (n = 60), versus
LOD (3 to 6 punctures in each ovary depending on size of ovary) followed by multivitamins twice daily. If anovulatory at 6 months clomiphene citrate 150 mg daily from day 3 ‐7 (n = 60)
Follow‐up for 6 months
Outcomes Live birth, adverse events, menstrual cycle characteristics, ovulation rate, pregnancy, miscarriage, costs
Notes Conflict of interest: not stated
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "The randomisation was carried out using online software to generate a random allocation sequence in double block as method of restriction"
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote: 'The random allocation sequence was concealed until the interventions were assigned"
Comment: there were no further details in the paper
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Participants were blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Outcome assessors were blinded
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk 6 women in metformin group and 5 in the LOD group. Reasons given were evidence of minimal endometriosis by laparoscopy (4 in Group A and 2 from Group B) and non‐compliance (1 from each group). 1 woman from Group A and 2 from group B were excluded for weight loss observed in the first 3 months of the study
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk The original protocol could not be retrieved. All outcomes cited in the Methods section were reported
Other bias Low risk No evidence of other risk of bias