CORRECTION article

Front. Cardiovasc. Med., 19 June 2023

Sec. Cardiovascular Epidemiology and Prevention

Volume 10 - 2023 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2023.1186990

Corrigendum: Cardiovascular risk according to body mass index in reproductive-aged women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 1. Hypertension Center, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China

  • 2. School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China

Article metrics

View details

1

Citations

1,4k

Views

521

Downloads

This article is a correction to:

  1. Cardiovascular Risk According to Body Mass Index in Women of Reproductive Age With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    1. Read original article

A Corrigendum on Cardiovascular risk according to body mass index in women of reproductive age with polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis By Zhuang C, Luo X, Wang W, Sun R, Qi M, and Yu J. (2022) Front. Cardiovasc Med. 9:822079. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.822079

Error in Figure/Table

In the published article, there was an error in [Table 1Search strategies] as published. [We had searched PubMed for the first set of results in Table 1 and not PubMed-MEDLINE]. The corrected caption in [Table 1Search strategies] is **[PubMed] which appears below.

PubMed

In the published article, there was an error in [Table 2 Characteristics of included studies in the meta-analysis]. The corrected [Table 2 Characteristics of included studies in the meta-analysis] and its caption **[Table 2 Characteristics of included studies in the meta-analysis] appear below.

Table 2

Author/Year Place of study Type of study PCOS vs. control (n) Participants age BMI WHR Androgen level Outcomes
Akram (2010) Pakistan Retrospective 50 vs. 30 20–39 years PCOS: 23.6 ± 0.50 kg/m2;
Control: 23.5 ± 0.71 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Adali (2010) Turkey Prospective 26 vs. 25 PCOS: 24.73 ± 2.91 years;
Control: 25.04 ± 2.26 years		 PCOS: 24.40 ± 4.23 kg/m2;
Control: 23.90 ± 3.95 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.74 ± 0.05; Control: 0.73 ± 0.04 – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Alexandraki (2006) Greece Cross-section 27 vs. 27 PCOS: 25.41 ± 0.80 years; Control: 27.33 ± 0.83 years PCOS: 27.42 ± 1.12 kg/m2;
Control: 25.05 ± 1.19 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.78 ± 0.01; Control: 0.75 ± 0.01 PCOS: 10.85 ± 0.76 nmol/L;
Control: 5.37 ± 0.38 nmol/L		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C, SBP, DBP
Arikan (2007) Turkey Prospective 39 vs. 30 PCOS: 22.82 ± 5.53 years;
Control: 24.64 ± 4.22 years		 PCOS: 21.48 ± 6.50 kg/m2;
Control: 20.90 ± 6.04 kg/m2		 – PCOS: 2.98 ± 1.31 ng/ml;
Control: 1.37 ± 0.89 ng/ml		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Berneis (2009) Italy Cross-section 30 vs. 24 PCOS: 25.1 ± 4.2 years;
Control: 25.5 ± 3 years		 PCOS: 28.4 ± 5.8 kg/m2;
Control: 28 ± 4.4 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Cascella (2006) Italy Prospective 50 vs. 50 PCOS: 21.9 ± 2.7 years;
Control: 22.2 ± 2.8 years		 PCOS: 24.6 ± 2.5 kg/m2;
Control: 24.4 ± 2.8 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.86 ± 0.1; Control: 0.83 ± 0.1 PCOS: 5.1 ± 0.7 nmol/L;
Control: 1.4 ± 0.6 nmol/L		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Calzada (2018) Spain Retrospective 125 vs. 169 PCOS: 28.0 ± 5.0 years;
Control: 30.0 ± 6.0 years		 PCOS: 25.7 ± 7.1 kg/m2;
Control: 22.3 ± 3.1 kg/m2		 – PCOS: 2.73 ± 1.35 ng/ml;
Control: 2.17 ± 1.05 ng/ml		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Cetinkalp (2009) Turkey Prospective 129 vs. 91 PCOS: 24.58 ± 4.61 years;
Control: 25.48 ± 3.38 years		 PCOS: 24.47 ± 4.64 kg/m2;
Control: 24.20 ± 3.31 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Cheng (2015) China Prospective 103 vs. 96 PCOS: 26 ± 4 years;
Control: 26 ± 2 years		 PCOS: 24.2 ± 5.3 kg/m2
Control: 20.5 ± 2.7 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.9 ± 0.3; Control: 0.8 ± 0.1 – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Cussons (2009) Australia Cross-section 19 vs. 19 PCOS: 30.4 ± 5.54 years;
Control: 34.44 ± 7.8 years		 PCOS: 24.1 ± 2.9 kg/m2
Control: 22.9 ± 3.2 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.8 ± 0.1; Control: 0.8 ± 0.6 PCOS: 10.89 ± 3.99 nmol/L;
Control: 8.54 ± 2.41 nmol/L		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Diamanti-Kandarakis (2006) Greece Prospective 25 vs. 25 PCOS: 25.64 ± 0.86 years;
Control: 27.52 ± 1.02 years		 PCOS: 29.08 ± 1.43 kg/m2;
Control: 26.22 ± 1.16 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.79 ± 0.01; Control: 0.75 ± 0.01 – HDL-C, SBP, DBP, nonHDLC
El-Kannishy (2010) Egypt Cross-section 14 vs. 10 PCOS: 25.2 ± 3.6 years;
Control: 24.4 ± 4.07 years		 PCOS: 22.8 ± 2.1 kg/m2
Control: 21.9 ± 2.97 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Erdogan (2007) USA Retrospective 68 vs. 26 PCOS: 24.27 ± 5.44 years;
Control: 26.41 ± 5.65 years		 PCOS: 24.41 ± 5.43 kg/m2
Control: 23.35 ± 5.04 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Erdogan (2009) USA Retrospective 88 vs. 119 PCOS: 24.07 ± 1.32 years; Control: 25.01 ± 2.05 years PCOS: 24.38 ± 4.13 kg/m2
Control: 23.47 ± 4.12 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Glintborg (2013) Denmark Prospective 30 vs. 14 PCOS: 32.3 ± 7.9 years;
Control: 34.3 ± 12.4 years		 PCOS: 33.5 ± 4.2 kg/m2;
Control: 32.8 ± 7.1 kg/m2		 – – TG
Gonzalez (2020) USA Cross-section Lean: 10 vs. 10; Obese: 9 vs. 9 Lean: PCOS: 27 ± 1 years;
Control: 29 ± 2 years;
Obese: PCOS: 28 ± 2 years;
Control: 32 ± 2 years		 Lean: PCOS: 22.5 ± 0.6 kg/m2;
Control: 22.0 ± 0.8 kg/m2;
Obese: PCOS: 34.4 ± 0.9 kg/m2;
Control: 34.1 ± 0.7 kg/m2		 – Lean: PCOS: 4.1 ± 0.4 ng/ml;
Control: 1.8 ± 0.8 ng/ml;
Obese: PCOS: 3.8 ± 0.3 ng/ml;
Control: 2.0 ± 0.2 ng/ml		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Kargili (2010) Turkery Cross-section 168 vs. 52 PCOS: 25.7 ± 5.5 years;
Control: 26.1 ± 5.4 years		 PCOS: 26.8 ± 3.4 kg/m2;
Control: 25.4 ± 2.8 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Ketel (2010) Netherlands Cross-section Lean: 22 vs. 17
Obese: 18 vs. 13		 Lean: PCOS: 28.6 ± 4.5 years; Control: 27.7 ± 5.3 years;
Obese: PCOS: 30.3 ± 4.2 years; Control: 28.6 ± 5.3 years		 Lean: PCOS: 22.0 ± 2.2 kg/m2;
Control: 22.2 ± 1.7 kg/m2;
Obese: PCOS: 36.2 ± 5.9 kg/m2;
Control: 40.5 ± 7.0 kg/m2		 Lean: PCOS: 0.78 ± 0.05;
Control: 0.76 ± 0.03;
Obese: PCOS: 0.84 ± 0.05;
Control: 0.80 ± 0.01		 Lean: PCOS: 7.0 ± 1.8 nmol/L;
Control: 4.8 ± 1.2 nmol/L;
Obese: PCOS: 7.7 ± 2.4 nmol/L;
Control: 4.9 ± 1.7 nmol/L		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Legro (2001) USA Cross-section Lean: 42 vs. 27; Obese: 153 vs. 35 Lean: PCOS: 25 ± 6 years;
Control: 29 ± 7 years;
Obese: PCOS: 28 ± 5 years;
Control: 32 ± 7 years		 Lean: PCOS: 23.1 ± 2.4 kg/m2;
Control: 23.0 ± 1.8 kg/m2;
Obese: PCOS: 37.0 ± 6.9 kg/m2;
Control: 37.7 ± 6.4 kg/m2		 Lean: PCOS: 0.76 ± 0.07;
Control: 0.75 ± 0.06;
Obese: PCOS: 0.85 ± 0.10;
Control: 0.79 ± 0.06		 Lean: PCOS: 2,553 ± 1,367 ng/ml;
Control: 1,628 ± 734 ng/ml;
Obese: PCOS: 2,476 ± 1,140 ng/ml;
Control: 1,533 ± 720 ng/mla		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Liang (2012) Taiwan Prospective Lean: 110 vs. 50; Obese: 110 vs. 20 Lean: PCOS: 26.8 ± 5.1 years;
Control: 28.1 ± 4.2 years
Obese: PCOS: 27.0 ± 6.4 years;
Control: 29.0 ± 5.1 years		 Lean: PCOS: 20.6 ± 2.0 kg/m2;
Control: 20.4 ± 2.0 kg/m2;
Obese: PCOS: 31.1 ± 3.9 kg/m2;
Control: 30.4 ± 3.7 kg/m2		 Lean: PCOS: 0.79 ± 0.06;
Control: 0.82 ± 0.14;
Obese: PCOS: 0.89 ± 0.08;
Control: 0.85 ± 0.08		 – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Long (2019) China Cross-section 387 vs. 150 PCOS: 27.0 ± 4.5 years;
Control: 25.3 ± 2.2 years		 PCOS: 25.4 ± 4.6 kg/m2;
Control: 20.7 ± 2.6 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.86 ± 0.06; Control: 0.80 ± 0.07 – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Luque-Ramirez (2007) Spain Cross-section Lean: 11 vs. 8; Overweight: 13 vs. 4; Obese: 16 vs. 8 Lean: PCOS: 23.0 ± 5.4 years;
Control: 24.8 ± 6.0 years;
Overweight: PCOS: 23.6 ± 4.6 years; Control: 29.3 ± 10.3 years;
Obese: PCOS: 26.3 ± 6.7 years;
Control: 28.5 ± 5.8 years		 Lean: PCOS: 22.2 ± 2.0 kg/m2;
Control: 21.3 ± 1.3 kg/m2;
Overweight: PCOS: 27.5 ± 1.8 kg/m2;
Control: 27.4 ± 1.5 kg/m2
Obese: PCOS: 35.8 ± 3.9 kg/m2;
Control: 35.5 ± 3.2 kg/m2		 Lean: PCOS: 0.73 ± 0.06;
Control: 0.73 ± 0.06;
Overweight: PCOS: 0.79 ± 0.07; Control: 0.79 ± 0.04;
Obese: PCOS: 0.88 ± 0.09;
Control: 0.83 ± 0.08		 PCOS: 12.7 ± 3.6 nmol/L;
Control: 7.2 ± 2.2 nmol/L		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Macut (2008) Serbia Prospective 75 vs. 51 PCOS: 23.1 ± 5.1 years;
Control: 24.6 ± 4.1 years		 PCOS: 24.9 ± 4.7 kg/m2;
Control: 23.7 ± 4.0 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.79 ± 0.06; Control: 0.77 ± 0.05 – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Meyer (2005) Australia Retrospective 100 vs. 20 PCOS: 32.7 ± 1.8 years;
Control: 33.2 ± 2.3 years		 PCOS: 37.3 ± 2.43 kg/m2;
Control: 36.7 ± 1.28 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.86 ± 0.01; Control: 0.84 ± 0.02 PCOS: 4.9 ± 0.3 mmol/L;
Control: 3.6 ± 0.4 mmol/La		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Moran (2009) Australia Cross-section 80 vs. 27 PCOS: 34.1 ± 6.9 years;
Control: 33.8 ± 6.8 years		 PCOS: 36.0 ± 6.6 kg/m2;
Control: 37.4 ± 5.6 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.86 ± 0.08; Control: 0.84 ± 0.06 PCOS: 4.8 ± 0.3 µmol/L;
Control: 3.4 ± 0.4 µmol/La		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Ni (2009) China Retrospective 578 vs. 281 PCOS: 27.3 ± 3.7 years;
Control: 28.3 ± 3.7 years		 PCOS: 22.1 ± 3.7 kg/m2;
Control: 22.2 ± 2.2 kg/m2		 – PCOS: 5.4 ± 2.5 µmol/L;
Control: 4.4 ± 1.9 µmol/La		 TG, SBP, DBP
Oral (2009) Turkey Prospective 48 vs. 43 PCOS: 23.9 ± 3.3 years;
Control: 24.2 ± 3.9 years		 PCOS: 24.1 ± 2.9 kg/m2;
Control: 24.0 ± 1.9 kg/m2		 – PCOS: 256.3 ± 59.5 µg/dl;
Control: 246.5 ± 59.5 µg/dla		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Orio (2004) Italy Prospective 30 vs. 30 PCOS: 22.2 ± 2.5 years;
Control: 22.6 ± 2.3 years		 PCOS: 22.4 ± 2.1 kg/m2;
Control: 22.1 ± 1.8 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.77 ± 0.4; Control: 0.72 ± 0.3 PCOS: 4,535 ± 527 µmol/L;
Control: 2,988 ± 311 µmol/La		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C,
Philbois (2019) Brazil Retrospective 60 vs. 30 PCOS without obese: 28.5 ± 5.2 years; PCOS without obese: 30.2 ± 5.3 years; Control: 31.2 ± 6.6 years PCOS without obese: 22.9 ± 1.6 kg/m2; PCOS with obese: 33.9 ± 2.4 kg/m2; Control: 23.5 ± 3 kg/m2 – – SBP, DBP
Rizzo (2011) Italy Prospective 350 vs. 90 PCOS: 24 ± 5 years;
Control: 24 ± 3 years		 PCOS: 27 ± 7 kg/m2; Control: 27 ± 4 kg/m2 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Sasaki (2011) Japan Prospective 54 vs. 24 PCOS: 30.2 ± 3.9 years; Control: 31.5 ± 4.4 years PCOS: 24.3 ± 5.7 kg/m2;
Control: 22.2 ± 3.4 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Shafiee (2020) UK Cross-section 34 vs. 34 PCOS: 31.8 ± 5.97 years; Control: 43.68 ± 13.12 years PCOS: 29.28 ± 2.91 kg/m2;
Control: 28.58 ± 2.62 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.88 ± 0.03; Control: 0.85 ± 0.02 – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Shroff (2007) USA Prospective 24 vs. 24 PCOS: 32 ± 6.5 years;
Control: 36 ± 7.2 years		 PCOS: 36 ± 5.4 kg/m2;
Control: 35 ± 3.3 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.85 ± 0.1; Control: 0.82 ± 0.1 – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG
Soares (2009) Brazil Cross-section 40 vs. 50 PCOS: 24.5 ± 3.8 years;
Control: 24.5 ± 5.1 years		 PCOS: 22.7 ± 3.3 kg/m2;
Control: 23.1 ± 3.2 kg/m2		 – – HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, DBP, nonHDL-C
Tarkun (2004) Turkey Prospective 37 vs. 25 PCOS: 23.45 ± 4.3 years; Control: 24.4 ± 4.07 years PCOS: 23.85 ± 3.26 kg/m2;
Control: 22.9 ± 2.97 kg/m2		 – PCOS: 4.08 ± 2.3 ng/ml;
Control: 2.89 ± 1.1 ng/ml		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Tiras (1999) Turkey Prospective 35 vs. 35 PCOS: 24.5 ± 6.0 years;
Control: 23.6 ± 3.9 years		 PCOS: 22.9 ± 4.2 kg/m2;
Control: 22.0 ± 1.8 kg/m2		 – PCOS: 4.05 ± 3.14 ng/ml;
Control: 2.48 ± 0.98 ng/ml		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C
Vryonidou (2005) Greece Prospective 75 vs. 55 PCOS: 23.9 ± 5.4 years;
Control: 24.7 ± 5.3 years		 PCOS: 27.3 ± 7.0 kg/m2;
Control: 26.3 ± 7.7 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.79 ± 0.07; Control: 0.75 ± 0.04 PCOS: 8.12 ± 9.11 µmol/L;
Control: 6.54 ± 8.59 µmol/La		 HDL-C, LDL-C, TG, SBP, nonHDL-C
Yildiz (2002) Turkey Prospective 59 vs. 23 PCOS: 22.9 ± 4.4 years;
Control: 24.8 ± 4.2 years		 PCOS: 23.0 ± 2.4 kg/m2;
Control: 22.1 ± 2.2 kg/m2		 PCOS: 0.76 ± 0.02; Control: 0.71 ± 0.02 PCOS: 9.4 ± 3.1 nmol/L;
Control: 5.9 ± 1.7 nmol/L		 HDL-C, TG, nonHDL-C

Characteristics of included studies in the meta-analysis.

a

Represented that these studies measured the level of dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, others measured androstenedione level. WHR: Waist-to-hip ratio; BMI: Body mass index; LDL-C: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG: triglyceride; HDL-C: low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; SBP: Systolic blood pressure; DBP: Diastolic blood pressure.

Figure

Figure

The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

In the published article, there was an error in (Figure 4) as published. [We have revised Figure 4, in which we had included an incorrect study]. The corrected [Figure 4] and its caption **[Forest plot for comparison of non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol in polycystic ovary syndrome vs. control subjects. Studies are classified by different body mass index (BMI) categories (BMI < 25 kg/m2, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, and BMI 25–30 kg/m2).] appear above.

The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

Text Correction

In the published article, there was two errors in the method.

1. According to the corrected figure, we revised the result of non-HDL-C].

An error was found in [Methods], [Study selection and criteria], [Page 2]. This sentence previously stated:

“[(4) articles published in languages other than English]” This sentence should be deleted.

2. [The selection criteria for the retrieved articles was unclear in the sixth information].

A correction has been made to [Methods], [Study selection and criteria], [Page 2]. This sentence previously stated:

“[6) each article had to conduct BMI matching]”

The corrected sentence appears below: 6) each article had to conduct BMI matching or the equal BMI (mean)

A correction has been made to [Results], [Lipid profiles], [Page 8]. This sentence previously stated:

“[As shown in Figure 4, non-HDL-C [SMD (95% CI): 0.42 (0.31, 0.52), P < 0.001] increased in reproductive-aged women with PCOS, with significant between-study heterogeneity. The subgroup analysis showed that non-HDL-C increased in women with PCOS at the three BMI levels, including BMI < 25 kg/m2 [SMD (95% CI): 0.40 (0.27, 0.54), P < 0.001], BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 [MD (95% CI): 0.52 (0.33, 0.70), P < 0.001], and BMI 25–30 kg/m2 [MD (95% CI): 0.37 (0.11, 0.62), P = 0.005]. In this analysis, no publication bias was evident (asymmetry test P = 0.291).]”

The corrected sentence appears below:

“[As shown in Figure 4, non-HDL-C [SMD (95% CI): 0.42 (0.31, 0.53), P < 0.001] increased in reproductive-aged women with PCOS, with significant between-study heterogeneity. The subgroup analysis showed that non-HDL-C increased in women with PCOS at the three BMI levels, including BMI < 25 kg/m2 [SMD (95% CI): 0.40 (0.27, 0.54), P < 0.001], BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 [MD (95% CI): 0.57 (0.37, 0.77), P < 0.001], and BMI 25–30 kg/m2 [MD (95% CI): 0.37 (0.11, 0.62), P = 0.005].]”

The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

Summary

Keywords

polycystic ovary syndrome, cardiovascular risk, reproductive-age, meta-analysis, body mass index

Citation

Zhuang C, Luo X, Wang W, Sun R, Qi M and Yu J (2023) Corrigendum: Cardiovascular risk according to body mass index in reproductive-aged women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 10:1186990. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1186990

Received

15 March 2023

Accepted

22 May 2023

Published

19 June 2023

Volume

10 - 2023

Edited and reviewed by

Dexter Canoy, Newcastle University, United Kingdom

Updates

Copyright

© 2023 Zhuang, Luo, Wang, Sun, Qi and Yu.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Jing Yu

†These authors have contributed equally to this work

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Share on WeChat

Scan with WeChat to share this article

Article metrics