Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Nepal Journal of Epidemiology logoLink to Nepal Journal of Epidemiology
. 2021 Sep 30;11(3):1063–1075. doi: 10.3126/nje.v11i3.38460

Polycystic ovary syndrome among Indian adolescent girls – A systematic review and metanalysis

Megha Sharma 1, Meenakshi Khapre 2,✉, Vartika Saxena 3, Pawna Kaushal 4
PMCID: PMC8560138  PMID: 34733568

Abstract

Background

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common endocrine disorder in the progenitive age group and the leading cause of infertility. The worldwide prevalence of PCOS in women varies between 2.2% to 26%. Due to limited literature on burden of PCOS among adolescent girls, its significance is still unfathomed as a research is few and far between in the present time. We conducted Systematic review and metanalysis to estimate the pooled prevalence of PCOS among Indian adolescent girls (14-19 years).

Methods

With the help of a search strategy, two authors searched Scopus, Embase and Pubmed independently. We screened studies considering eligibility criteria and extracted data. Selected studies were assessed for quality and risk biases using the NIH tool. R software was used for analysis.

Results

Twelve studies were included in the meta-analysis. The total number of participants in the study was 4473. All studies scored average and above as per the NIH quality assessment tool. The prevalence of PCOS among adolescents based on the Rotterdam criteria was 17.74 per 100 (CI = 11.77-23.71) with I2 =97 %. Hospital-based studies had a comparatively higher prevalence of PCOS as compared to community-based.

Conclusion

Pooled prevalence of PCOS among Indian adolescents’ girls was high, approximately one in five.

Keywords: Adolescence, Epidemiology, Menstrural disorder, Polycystic ovaries, Prevalence

Introduction

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common endocrinological problem in the progenitive age group and the leading cause of infertility. PCOS expose women at high risk of developing complications, such as infertility, metabolic disorders such as type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, other cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disorders, if it remains untreated [1]. Such complications impair social and mental well-being, and adversely impacted the quality of life of the patients. Long-term follow-up of 786 women with PCOS observed an elevated risk of endometrial cancer [2,3]. The prevalence of PCOS ranges from 2.2% to 26% worldwide [4]. Among Asian countries, the prevalence of PCOS ranges from as low as 2.4% in China [5] to 19.5% in Iran [6]. A recent metanalysis (2019) by Naz et al. concluded that there is a regional variation in the prevalence of PCOS among adolescents. Varying prevalence is due to different diagnostic criteria, i.e. National Health Institute (NIH) 1990, Rotterdams (2003) and Androgen excess society (AES) 2006. The reported prevalence was 11.04% with Rotterdam criteria, 3.39% with NIH criteria, and 8.03% based on AES [7].

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines an adolescent as any person between 10 and 19 years. Due to the modern lifestyle, PCOS is commonly seen in the adolescent age group. The clinical manifestation of PCOS may be complete in adolescence, but the diagnosis is challenging as some features of PCOS overlap with the transitional characterstics from puberty to adulthood [8]. Hyperandrogenism and oligoanvolution criteria suggested by AES (2006) is not considered valid for early teenagers [9].

To date, available studies possessess limited sample size which failed to capture attention of policy makers. School health programme could have been the best platform to capture PCOS at an early age. Due to limited awareness of this issue among the school staff, health care workers and beneficiaries, prevailing cultural taboos, this issue remain unaddressed, neglecting its long term effect on women’s physical and mental health. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of PCOS among adolescent girls (14-19 years) in India. Mean age of girls in India to start menstruration is 12 years and PCOS occurs after 2 years of menarche, therefore we chosen 14-19 years age group adoloscents.

Methodology

Literature Searches

This review’s conducting and reporting adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines [10]. We extensively searched studies from 2011 onwards, three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus) with Mesh terms related to polycystic ovarian syndrome and adolescence like subheadings B.M.I, Oligomenorrhea, Hirsutism, PCOS, Waist-Hip ratio. The search strategy for each database is in Annexure 1.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The observational studies with the following criteria: (1) Cross-sectional or cohort studies with participants as Indian Adolescent girls (14-19 years). (2) Outcome measured in terms of PCOS prevalence using NIH Criteria, AES criteria or Rotterdam’s criteria. We extracted the data of age group 15-19 years from the study. However while searching databases we found studies related to age group 10-19 years. Onset of menarche more than 2 years was inclusion criteria for this studies and considering the mean age of menarche as 12, we decided to include this studies. There may be very negligible proportion below 14 years. We excluded the article with non-English language and non-availability of full text with our best efforts.

Selection of studies and Data Extraction

We exported eligible studies to Zotero version 5 and removed duplicates. Two researchers (MK and MS) trained in Systematic review independently screened each article using a three-step approach. First, we reviewed the titles and abstracts of studies and excluded studies that did not meet eligibility criteria. We further examined the retrieved full text of eligible studies and noted the reasons for exclusion. Discrepancy was resolved with discussion and a third researcher (VS). We Cross-referenced all included studies to find out missed out relevant studies, searched through Google Scholar.

MK and MS independently extracted data with data extraction form. Data extraction form consisted of study design, sample size, place of study(urban/ rural), Setting (community/school/hospital), publication year, sampling technique, diagnostic techniques, and PCOS prevalence. We resolved the discrepancy in data extraction by discussion and built consensus.

Risk of Bias

We used the NIH quality assessment tool [11] to assess the quality and risk of bias of the included studies. The NIH tool consisted of 14 dichotomous (yes/no) questions, out of which Q.10 and Q.13 were not applicable for cross-sectional studies. We rated the quality of each study based on our best judgment. If the answer to any question was “No”, then examined the potential of bias in a study.

Data Analysis and Synthesis

Data management was done using Microsoft Excel 2013. We performed a narrative synthesis of included studies. Metaanalysis (pooled prevalence of PCOS) and forest plots was plotted with R software version 3.6.1. Clinical, methodological and statistical heterogeneity among studies was assessed. For statistical heterogeneity, chi-square, p-value <0.05 and I2 >40% was considered. The random-effect model (Dersermonion and Laird method) with “dmetafor” function was used for analysis due to high heterogeneity. We assessed and quantified the risk of publication bias with the Funnel plot and Eggers regression test, respectively. We also found outlier using “dmetar” package in R. We performed a Sensitivity analysis to explore the influence of study setting and study design on PCOS prevalence. We have merged school/colleges as community-based studies for sensitivity analysis.

This metaanalysis was registered at Prospero (Registration# CRD42020212443). Ethical approval was obtained from Institutional Ethical Committee prior to commencing the systematic review.

Results

The extensive search of potential studies in the three databases, yielded a total of 247 studies which were imported to Zotero. After removing the duplicates (n=64) and relevant 47 studies were subjected to full-text review, and finally included 12 articles in the present systematic review and meta-analysis. (Fig 1)

Figure 1:

Figure 1:

Open in a new tab

PRISMA flow diagram which included database search using keywords, title, abstract screening and full text

Characteristic of included studies

Characteristics of included studies is given in table 1. In 12 studies, 528 adolescents’ girls (14-19 years) were having PCOS out of 3,945 girls. The mean age of the participants was 16.8 (2.059) years. Four studies were published between 2011 and 2014, five studies between 2015 to 2018 and three studies between 2019 and 2020. Seven studies were conducted in the south zone, three in west, one each in east and central zone of India. Nine studies used only Rotterdam criteria, two studies used both NIH and Rotterdam and one study used AES and Rotterdam. Except one, all 13 studies were cross-sectional in nature. Six studies conducted in a hospital area, four in school/colleges and two in the community.

Table 1:

Characteristics of the included studies

S.No. Study Year Area of study Type of study Location No. of participants Age group of participant Prevalence of PCOS
NIH criteria AES criteria Rotterdam’s criteria
1 Nidhi R, et al . [12] 2012 Semi-urban and rural area Cross sectional Bangalore 460 15-18 years 12 NE 42
2 Nair.M, et al. [13] 2012 Urban Cohort study Thiruvananthapuram 136 15-17 years NE NE 49
3 Joshi B, et al. [14] 2014 Urban Cross sectional Mumbai 439 15-19 years NE 34 72
4 Bhuvanashree,N et al. [15] 2014 Rural Cross sectional Andhra Pradesh 253 10-19 years NE NE 39
5 Balaji S, et al. [16] 2015 Urban and Rural Cross sectional Tamil Nadu 126 14-19 years 31 NE 90
6 Rajkumari P, et al. [17] 2016 Urban Cross sectional Bhubaneswar 100 14-17 years NE NE 12
7 Gupta M, et al. [18] 2017 Urban Cross sectional Bhopal 840 15-18 years NE NE 26
8 Singh A, et al. [19] 2018 Urban Cross sectional Hyderabad 117 15-19 years NE NE 14
9 Desai NA, et al. [20] 2018 Urban Cross sectional Ahmedabad 881 13-18 years NE NE 119
10 Manish MM, et al. [21] 2019 Urban Cross sectional Maharashtra 150 10-19 years NE NE 19
11 Kirthika SV, et al. [22] 2019 Urban Cross sectional Chennai 300 14-18 years NE NE 37
12 Joseph N, et al. [23] 2020 Urban Cross sectional Mangalore 143 18-19 years NE NE 9
Total 4473
Open in a new tab

*NE=Not estimated

Quality assessment

Cross-sectional studies scored between 6-10 out of 12, and cohort study scored 11 out of 14. Half of the studies (n=7) rated as fair quality and the later half as good (n=5). Except for three studies (14,15,23), all others have a low risk of bias. All studies reported a lower non-response rate. Studies done in a hospital setting had no recall bias as diagnosis mainly depends on the physician. Gupta [18] reporting of Hirsutism and androgen production was not based on the Ferryman-Gallewey model [24]. Participants selected their degree of hair growth across nine key anatomical sites based on pictographic representations, so we considered this study had a risk measurement bias. (Table 2)

Table 2:

Score based on NIH quality assessment tool, quality and biases in included studies.

S.No. Study Year Score Quality Selection bias Information bias Confounding bias Measurement bias Non response bias Overall risk of bias
graphic file with name nje-11-1063-t001.jpg
Open in a new tab

Outcome measures and Heterogeneity among included studies We used Rotterdam crtiteria to estimate the pooled prevalence as it was used in all the included studies. Pooled proportion of PCOS among adolescents girls (14-19 years) in Indian settings with random effect model was found to be 17.74 per 100 (CI = 11.77-23.71) with I2 statistics of 97% (Fig 2).

Figure 2:

Figure 2:

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of pooled prevalence of PCOS among adolescents (14-19 years): Random effect Model

Sensitivity analysis

We conducted a sensitivity analysis to explore the influence of study setting and design on the proportion of PCOS. Figure 3 A shows pooled proportion according to different study setting. In a Community Setting with six studies, PCOS was 11% (CI=5%-17%), I2 =96%, while in a hospital setting, the pooled prevalence was 25% (CI= 12%-39%), I2=98%. Fig 3 B shows the pooled proportion of PCOS in cross-sectional studies was 16% (10%-22%), I2=97% and in one cohort study, the proportion was 36% (28%-44%).

Figure 3A:

Figure 3A:

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of pooled proportion of PCOS among adolescent’s (14-19 years) according to different study setting

Figure 3B:

Figure 3B:

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of pooled proportion of PCOS among adolescent’s girls (14-19 years) in different study design

Publication bias

Fig 4 shows the funnel plot of 12 studies. Two studies Nair. M [13] and Balaji [16] are far from a funnel with large effects and small sample sizes. Gupta M. [18] had a low prevalence of 0.3 with small SE (large sample). Egger test intercept was 8.089 (3.71-12.47) and p-value < 0.05 depicting the presence of asymmetry in the funnel plot.

Figure 4:

Figure 4:

Open in a new tab

Funnel plot of included studies in meta-analysis

Outlier analysis

Fig 5 shows five studies as outliers, and when removed, the heterogeneity was 0 % and pooled prevalence of 13.8% CI(12.37% to 15.22%).

Figure 5:

Figure 5:

Open in a new tab

Outlier analysis of included studies

Discussion

The pooled proportion of PCOS among adolescents girls age group (14-19 years) according to Rotterdam criteria in Indian settings was found to be 17.74 per 100 (CI 11.77-23.71). Balaji S et al. shows a very high proportion of PCOS, i.e. 71.43 per 100 (CI=62.70-79.12) adolescent girls [16]. Gupta M et al shows the lowest proportion of PCOS, i.e. 3.10 per 100(CI=2.03-4.50) [18]. A meta-analysis done by Naz MS 2019 [7] included studies worldwide, including four from India, five from Iran and one each from Thailand and Southern California respectively. All these studies were community-based, and the finding was comparable to our pooled community-based studies i.e 11 per 100 (0.05-0.17). The participants’ mean age in the current review was 16.8 years (SD=2.059), and in Naz was 16.99 years (16.46-17.52). The pooled prevalence as per NIH criteria was 3.39% (0.28-9.45%), and AES was 8.03% (6.24-10.01%). Publication bias was not seen in Naz study. We have not conducted a pooled analysis of prevalence as per NIH and AES criteria as it was estimated respectively in two studies and one study only [12,14,16]. Further in our meta-analysis, publication bias was seen. Two hospital-based studies [13,16] with smaller sample size had reported higher proportion of PCOS.

A meta-analysis by Ghiasi A (2019) found a lower prevalence of PCOS (7 %, 95% CI: 6-8%) among Iranian adolescents using Rotterdam criteria compared to the current metanalysis [25] Skiba AM reported prevalence of PCOS as 7 % (6-7 %) based on NIH criteria and 12% [95% CI: 10–15%] based on Rotterdam criteria [26]. Rotterdam criteria were formulated to expand NIH criteria and are a broader concept used widely in community studies. In present metanalysis after removing the outliers, the prevalence of PCOS among adolescent was 13 % per 100, that may still be under-reported. Another metanalysis by Jalilian A. et al (2015) among Iranian women (10-45 years) found a comparatively higher prevalence of PCOS (19.5 %). (6) The prevalence among women is higher than the adolescent age group because, first, PCOS is often overlooked in adolescent age. Secondly, it is challenging to diagnose as a menstrual pattern is difficult to distinguish from anovulation associated with puberty due to maturating hypothalamic pituitary ovarian axis [27].

We found a wide prevalence of PCOS within India. Meta-analysis by Ding and colleagues, reported prevalence rate in Chinese women was 5.6% (based on the Rotterdam criteria) and in Middle Eastern countries was 16% [28]. These differences in the prevalence of PCOS across geographical location, racial or ethnic groups may be attributed to environmental or genetic influence, study design, study setting, different diagnostic criteria and pattern of utilization of health care services. However, we do not attribute variation in our study to geographical location, as confirmed by Wolf, et al. [29]. Hospital based studies [12,13,16,19,21,22] may not represent the general population. Nair et al had prospectively followed a hospital-based cohort that resulted in a higher incidence of PCOS. Nidhi et al., Balaji et al., and Nair et al. were hospital-based reporting higher prevalence among five outlier studies. Other two outlier studies, Gupta et al. [18] and Joseph et al. [23], questionnaire was self administer resulting in low prevalence.

Expert opinion

Diagnosis of PCOS in adolescence is a challenge because of overlapping symptoms of PCOS with normal pubertal changes in adolescents. Incidence of PCOS among adolescence has been increasing due to modern lifestyle. Early diagnosis is important to instill early lifestyle modifications which will prevent metabolic and reproductive complications. Health education and screening for PCOS need to be incorporated in School or community based adolescent health programs. An assessment of target groups by simple menstrual history could detect possible PCOS during early adolescence to facilitate appropriate early intervention. We also recommend open discussion on menstruation problems in adolescent groups should be encouraged in schools and aaganwadi centres. Health talk should be established between mother and daughter and break the hesitance to seek timely medical advice.

Limitation of the study

The main limitation of our review is searching only three databases for screening and identifying studies. However, we conducted, a thorough search of the cross-references to include any eligible studies via google scholar. Epidemiology study design, varied study population and methodology added to heterogeneity.

We could find only six community-based studies with a limited sample size may not be adequate to comment on PCOS prevalence. Publication bias was noted with five outliers. Hospital-based study may have distorted the prevalence to the higher side, which was later rectified by sensitivity analysis showing comparatively lower prevalence.

Conclusion

It can be inferred that cooking food in iron pot escalates the levels of blood hemoglobin and iron content of the food, and thus reduces the incidences of iron deficiency anemia. The bioavailability of food containing heme iron increases more when cooked in iron pot than food having non-heme iron form. Also, the content of iron in the food was found to be increased by cooking acidic food with iron ingot. Very limited research trials are available on this topic that warrants a careful interpretation of results inferred and a considerable need of larger population-based studies and randomized controlled trials for better outcomes.

Acknowledgement

None

Annexure1:

Detailed search strategy used for each database

S.No. Database Search terms Number of studies identified
1 PubMed (((India*)) AND ((“polycystic ovarian syndrome” (MeSH) OR PCOD OR PCOS OR “Stein Leventhal Syndrome” OR “polycystic ovarian disease”))) AND (prevalence OR proportion) Filters: Abstract, Free full text, Female 16
2 Embase ‘ovary polycystic disease’/exp OR ‘ovary polycystic disease’ OR PCOS OR pcod AND ‘India’/exp OR India AND ‘Prevalence’/exp OR Prevalence OR proportion AND (‘clinical study’/de OR ‘cohort analysis’/de OR ‘comparative study’/de OR ‘correlational study’/de OR ‘cross sectional study’/de OR ‘human’/de OR ‘multicenter study’/de OR ‘observational study’/de OR ‘prospective study’/de OR ‘questionnaire’/de OR ‘retrospective study’/de OR ‘structured questionnaire’/de) AND [female]/lim AND (‘Article’/it OR ‘Article in Press’/it OR ‘Conference Abstract’/it OR ‘Conference Paper’/it) AND ([adolescent]/lim OR [adult]/lim OR [middle aged]/lim OR [young adult]/lim) 190
3 Scopus (TITLE-ABS-KEY (india* ) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (polycystic AND ovarian AND disease OR pcos OR pcod ) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (prevalence OR proportion ) ) AND (LIMIT-TO (PUBSTAGE, “final” ) OR LIMIT-TO (PUBSTAGE, “aip” ) ) AND (LIMIT-TO (ACCESSTYPE(OA) ) OR LIMIT-TO (ACCESSTYPE(OTHER) ) ) AND (LIMIT-TO (AFFILCOUNTRY, “India” ) ) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ar” ) OR LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “cp” ) ) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “English” ) ) 41
Open in a new tab

References

  • 1.Rajkumari P, Sahoo J, Sujata P, Sahoo G, Hansa J. Awareness about PCOS and the Likelihood of its Symptoms in Adolescent Girls in a Semi-Urban Set-Up: A Cross Sectional Study. Journal of Medical Science & Clinical Research. 2016;4(11):12264-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v4i11.119 10.18535/jmscr/v4i11.119 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Azziz R, Marin C, Hoq L, Badamgarav E, Song P. Health care-related economic burden of the polycystic ovary syndrome during the reproductive life span. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005. August;90(8):4650-8. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2005-0628 10.1210/jc.2005-0628 PMid: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wild S, Pierpoint T, McKeigue P, Jacobs H. Cardiovascular disease in women with polycystic ovary syndrome at long-term follow-up: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2000. May;52(5):595-600. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2265.2000.01000.x 10.1046/j.1365-2265.2000.01000.x PMid: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Fauser BC, Tarlatzis BC, Rebar RW, et al. Consensus on women’s health aspects of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS): the Amsterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored 3rd PCOS Consensus Workshop Group. Fertil Steril. 2012. January;97(1):28-38.e25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.024 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.024 PMid: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Chen X, Yang D, Mo Y, Li L, Chen Y, Huang Y. Prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome in unselected women from southern China. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2008. July;139(1):59-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.12.018 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2007.12.018 PMid: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Jalilian A, Kiani F, Sayehmiri F, Sayehmiri K, Khodaee Z, Akbari M. Prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome and its associated complications in Iranian women: A meta-analysis. Iran J Reprod Med. 2015. October;13(10):591-604. PMid: ; PMCiD: . [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Naz MSG, Tehrani FR, Majd HA, et al. The prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome in adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Reprod Biomed. 2019. September 3;17(8):533-542. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijrm.v17i8.4818 10.18502/ijrm.v17i8.4818 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS Consensus Workshop Group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2004. January;81(1):19-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.10.004 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.10.004 PMid: . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Buggs C, Rosenfield RL. Polycystic ovary syndrome in adolescence. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2005. September;34(3):677-705, x. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecl.2005.04.005 10.1016/j.ecl.2005.04.005 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2021. March 29;18(3):e1003583. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Study Quality Assessment Tools. National heart, lung, and blood institute. NIH. [online] 2021. July last update [cited 2021 September 23]. Available from: URL: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
  • 12.Nidhi R, Padmalatha V, Nagarathna R, Amritanshu R. Prevalence of polycystic ovarian syndrome in Indian adolescents. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2011. August;24(4):223-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2011.03.002 10.1016/j.jpag.2011.03.002 PMid: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Nair MK, Pappachan P, Balakrishnan S, Leena ML, George B, Russell PS. Menstrual irregularity and poly cystic ovarian syndrome among adolescent girls--a 2 year follow-up study. Indian J Pediatr. 2012. January;79 Suppl 1:S69-73. doi: 10.1007/s12098-011-0432-y. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-011-0432-y 10.1007/s12098-011-0432-y PMid: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Joshi B, Mukherjee S, Patil A, Purandare A, Chauhan S, Vaidya R. A cross-sectional study of polycystic ovarian syndrome among adolescent and young girls in Mumbai, India. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2014. May;18(3):317-24. https://doi.org/10.4103/2230-8210.131162 10.4103/2230-8210.131162 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Bhuvanashree N, Gupta S, Anitha M, Venkatarao E. Polycystic ovarian syndrome: prevalence and its correlates among adolescent girls. Ann Trop Med Public Health. 2013;6(6):632-636. https://doi.org/10.4103/1755-6783.140233 10.4103/1755-6783.140233 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Balaji S, Amadi C, Prasad S, et al. Urban rural comparisons of polycystic ovary syndrome burden among adolescent girls in a hospital setting in India. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:158951. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/158951 10.1155/2015/158951 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Rajkumari P, Sahoo J, Sujata P, Sahoo G, Hansa J. Awareness about PCOS and the Likelihood of its Symptoms in Adolescent Girls in a Semi-Urban Set-Up: A Cross Sectional Study. Journal of Medical Science & Clinical Research. 2016;4(11):12264-9. https://doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v4i11.119 10.18535/jmscr/v4i11.119 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Gupta M, Melwani V, Priya A, Toppo M, Khan A, Sethia S. A Study to Assess the Prevalence of Polycystic Ovarian Disease among Girls Aged 15-21 Years from Selected Schools and Colleges in Bhopal City. Ind. J. Youth Adol. Health. 2017;4(3). https://doi.org/10.24321/2349.2880.201717 10.24321/2349.2880.201717 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Singh A, Vijaya K, Laxmi KS. Prevalence of polycystic ovarian syndrome among adolescent girls: a prospective study. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2018;7:4375-8. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20184230 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20184230 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Desai NA, Tiwari RY, Patel SS. Prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome and its associated risk factors among adolescent and young girls in ahmedabad region. Indian Journal of Pharmacy Practice. 2018. July;11(3):119. https://doi.org/10.5530/ijopp.11.3.27 10.5530/ijopp.11.3.27 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Laddad MM, Kshirsagar NS, Shinde G, Shivade V. Study of prevalence and determinants of polycystic ovarian syndrome among adolescent girls in rural area: a prospective study. International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019. August 8(8):3135-3139. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20193524 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20193524 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Veena KS, Daggumati H, Padmanabhan K, Paul J, Sudhakar S, Senthil S P. Effect of Structured Awareness Programme on Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) among Adolescent Girls. Research J. Pharm. and Tech. 2019; 12(12): 6097-6100. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2019.01059.X 10.5958/0974-360X.2019.01059.X [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Joseph N, Reddy AG, Joy D, et al. Study on the proportion and determinants of polycystic ovarian syndrome among health sciences students in South India. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2016. Jul-Dec;7(2):166-72. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.184704 10.4103/0976-9668.184704 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Aswini R, Jayapalan S. Modified Ferriman-Gallwey Score in Hirsutism and its Association with Metabolic Syndrome. Int J Trichology. 2017. Jan-Mar;9(1):7-13. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijt.ijt_93_16 10.4103/ijt.ijt_93_16 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ashraf G, Afsaneh K. Prevalence of sexual dysfunction among reproductive-age women in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. Journal of midwifery & reproductive health. 2018;6(3):1390-1398. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Skiba MA, Islam RM, Bell RJ, Davis SR. Understanding variation in prevalence estimates of polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2018. November 1;24(6):694-709. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmy022 10.1093/humupd/dmy022 PMid: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Jalilian A, Kiani F, Sayehmiri F, Sayehmiri K, Khodaee Z, Akbari M. Prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome and its associated complications in Iranian women: A meta-analysis. Iran J Reprod Med. 2015. October;13(10):591-604. PMid: ; PMCiD: . [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Ding T, Hardiman PJ, Petersen I, Wang FF, Qu F, Baio G. The prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome in reproductive-aged women of different ethnicity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 2017. July 12;8(56):96351-96358. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.19180 10.18632/oncotarget.19180 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Wolf WM, Wattick RA, Kinkade ON, Olfert MD. Geographical Prevalence of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome as Determined by Region and Race/Ethnicity. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018. November 20;15(11):2589. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112589 10.3390/ijerph15112589 PMid: PMCid: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Nepal Journal of Epidemiology are provided here courtesy of International Nepal Epidemiological Association

RESOURCES