↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional supplements and herbal medicines for women with polycystic ovary syndrome; a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
305 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nutritional supplements and herbal medicines for women with polycystic ovary syndrome; a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12906-017-2011-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan Arentz, Caroline A. Smith, Jason Abbott, Alan Bensoussan

Abstract

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common, reproductive endocrinopathy associated with serious short and long term health risks. Many women with PCOS use ingestible complementary medicines. This systematic review examined the effect on menstrual regulation and adverse effects from randomised controlled trials. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared herbal or nutritional supplements to placebo or active controls in women with PCOS were eligible for inclusion. Electronic databases were searched to July 2017. Study selection and assessment of quality were conducted independently by two review authors. Twenty four studies (1406 women) investigating seven nutritional supplements and four herbal medicines were included. No one study was assessed as having a low risk of bias. Four trials reported on the primary endpoint menstrual regulation. There was no evidence on improved menstrual regularity for calcium plus vitamin D compared to Metformin (RR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.23, p = 0.19), reduced amenorrhoea for Camellia sinensis compared to placebo (RR: 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.72, p = 0.13) and no difference in the number of menses per month for Cinnamomum sp. against placebo (MD 0.05, 95% CI -0.36 to 1.36, p = 0.26). Adverse effects were investigated in seven studies (164 women). Mild adverse effects were found for Cinnamomum sp. compared to placebo (17 women, RR: 0.36, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.70, p = 0.03). No difference was found for adverse effects between inositol, B complex vitamins, vitamin D, chromium and placebo. Improved reproduction, metabolic hormones and hyperandrogenism was found for inositol and improved cholesterol for omega three fish oils. There is no high quality evidence to support the effectiveness of nutritional supplements and herbal medicine for women with PCOS and evidence of safety is lacking. High quality trials of nutritional supplements and herbal medicines examining menstrual regulation and adverse effects in women with PCOS are needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 305 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 305 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 52 17%
Student > Master 37 12%
Researcher 26 9%
Student > Postgraduate 18 6%
Other 14 5%
Other 44 14%
Unknown 114 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 74 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 54 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 5%
Unspecified 7 2%
Social Sciences 7 2%
Other 24 8%
Unknown 125 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,332,108
of 25,199,971 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#211
of 3,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,745
of 451,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#7
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,199,971 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,939 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 451,011 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.