4.7 Article

Consensus on women's health aspects of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS): the Amsterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored 3rd PCOS Consensus Workshop Group

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 97, 期 1, 页码 28-U84

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.024

关键词

Polycystic ovary syndrome; hirsutism; contraception; pregnancy complications; quality of life; insulin resistance; type 2 diabetes; metabolic syndrome; cardiovascular disease; cancer

资金

  1. Andromed
  2. Ardana
  3. Ferring
  4. Glycotope
  5. Genovum
  6. IBSA
  7. Merck (MSD)
  8. Merck Serono
  9. Organon
  10. Pantharei Bioscience
  11. PregLem
  12. Schering
  13. Schering Plough
  14. Serono
  15. Wyeth
  16. Merck Sharp Dohme
  17. U.S. National Institutes of Health
  18. Merck Serono S. A.
  19. Bayer
  20. Abbott
  21. Abbott laboratories
  22. Quest Diagnostics
  23. Merck, Sharp and Dohme Co.
  24. Medical Research Council [1241993] Funding Source: researchfish
  25. MRC [G0802782] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most common endocrine disorder in females, with a high prevalence. The etiology of this heterogeneous condition remains obscure, and its phenotype expression varies. Two widely cited previous ESHRE/ASRMsponsored PCOS consensus workshops focused on diagnosis (published in 2004) and infertility management (published in 2008), respectively. The present third PCOS consensus report summarizes current knowledge and identifies knowledge gaps regarding various women's health aspects of PCOS. Relevant topics addressed-all dealt with in a systematic fashion-include adolescence, hirsutism and acne, contraception, menstrual cycle abnormalities, quality of life, ethnicity, pregnancy complications, long-term metabolic and cardiovascular health, and finally cancer risk. Additional, comprehensive background information is provided separately in an extended online publication. (Fertil Steril (R) 2012;97:28-38. (C) 2012 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据