Prevalence of subclinical hypothyroidism in polycystic ovary syndrome and its impact on insulin resistance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Table 3 Comparison of findings from previous and current meta-analyses

Study	HOMA-IR WMD (95% CI)	Fasting insulin WMD (95% CI)	FPG WMD (95% CI)	2 h-PPG WMD (95% CI)	Comment
Pergialiotis (2017) [19]	0.82 (0.15, 1.50)	NR	1.62 (-0.71, 3.94)	NR	HOMA-IR was significantly higher in the SCH-PCOS group. FPG and 2 h-PPG were not different.
de Medeiros^a (2017) [20]	0.16 (-0.48, 0.80)	0.18 (CI is not reported)	0.11 (0.02, 0.20)	NR	FPG was significantly higher in the SCH-PCOS group. HOMA-IR and fasting insulin were not different.
Xing^b (2021) [18]	0.48 (0.26, 0.71)	NR	0.21 (0.08, 0.35)	-0.04 (-0.11, 0.19)	HOMA-IR and FPG were significantly higher in the SCH-PCOS group. 2 h-PPG was not different.
Current meta-analysis	0.78 (0.34, 1.22)	2.38 (0.34, 4.42)	1.66 (-0.06, 3.37)	10.10 (-3.49, 23.69)	HOMA-IR and fasting insulin were significantly higher in the SCH-PCOS group. FPG and 2 h-PPG were not different.

a: This study used the SCH-PCOS group as the reference. The signs of the WMD and 95% CI were reversed to ensure comparability with other studies. b: This study reported standardized mean difference instead of mean difference. CI: confidence interval, FPG: fasting plasma glucose, HOMA-IR: homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance, NR: not reported, PCOS: polycystic ovary syndrome, SCH: subclinical hypothyroidism, WMD: weighted mean difference, 2 h-PPG: 2-hour postprandial glucose

ISSN: 1472-6823