An observational study in Anovulation and Irregular Menses, sponsored by Jagiellonian University. Completed at 1 site in Poland. Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 45 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-03-19.
Sponsored by Jagiellonian University · Observational
Among the causes of ovulation disorders (group II of anovulation according to the World Health Organization classification), the dominant one is polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and the remaining cases are classified as Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Ovarian Axis Dysfunction (HPOD). The exact etiology of both entities is unknown. To diagnose PCOS, the Rotterdam criteria must be met and other conditions that may cause hyperandrogenism or ovulation disorders must be excluded. PCOS is more often accompanied by other endocrine and metabolic disorders, such as obesity, dyslipidemia, hyperandrogenism, insulin resistance, diabetes, hyperprolactinemia and thyroid diseases, as well as infertility due to ovulation defect. These conditions not only significantly reduce quality of life (QoL), but also lead to an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, adverse obstetric outcomes and an increased risk of endometrial cancer, further impairing QoL.
A prospective questionnaire study will be conducted regarding the quality of life among women undergoing hormonal diagnostics due to anovulation. The study will include women aged 18-45 with ovulation disorders: PCOS (arm 1) and HPOD (arm 2). The quality of life will be assessed using the self-assessment method using the SF-36 questionnaire (Short Form Health Survey). The questionnaire is intended for a subjective assessment of health status. It consists of 11 questions containing 36 statements that allow you to determine eight quality of life indicators, i.e.: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, role limitations due to emotional problems, energy/fatigue, emotional well-being, social functioning, pain, general health, health change.
The percentage score on a scale of 0-100% in each of the 8 life domains will be compared between both arms of the study.
75 studies on the registry are indexed under Anovulation; 7 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 990 is above the median of 300 across 17 observational studies indexed under Anovulation.
Browse Anovulation studies →Jagiellonian University is the lead sponsor of 161 studies on the registry; 35 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
The study group will consist of women aged 18-45, diagnosed with menstrual disorders and suspected PCOS.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS)
Other: 36-Item Short Form Survey Instrument (SF-36)
Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Ovarian Axis Dysfunction
Other: 36-Item Short Form Survey Instrument (SF-36)
Answering 36 questions in a quality-of-life survey (RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0): https://www.rand.org/health-care/surveys\_tools/mos/36-item-short-form/survey-instrument.html
Physical functioning
Comparison of physical functioning percentage score between both study arms on a scale from 0 to 100%, where 0% is the lowest result (the worst quality of life) and 100% is the maximum result (the best quality of life)
Time frame: 12 months
Bodily pain
Comparison of bodily pain percentage score between both study arms on a scale from 0 to 100%, where 0% is the lowest result (the worst quality of life) and 100% is the maximum result (the best quality of life)
Time frame: 12 months
Role limitations due to physical health problems
Comparison of role limitations due to physical health problems percentage score between both study arms on a scale from 0 to 100%, where 0% is the lowest result (the worst quality of life) and 100% is the maximum result (the best quality of life)
Time frame: 12 months
Role limitations due to personal or emotional problems
Comparison of role limitations due to personal or emotional problems score between both study arms on a scale from 0 to 100%, where 0% is the lowest result (the worst quality of life) and 100% is the maximum result (the best quality of life)
Time frame: 12 months
Emotional well-being
Comparison of emotional well-being percentage score between both study arms on a scale from 0 to 100%, where 0% is the lowest result (the worst quality of life) and 100% is the maximum result (the best quality of life)
Time frame: 12 months
Social functioning
Comparison of social functioning percentage score between both study arms on a scale from 0 to 100%, where 0% is the lowest result (the worst quality of life) and 100% is the maximum result (the best quality of life)
Time frame: 12 months
Energy/fatigue
Comparison of energy/fatigue percentage score between both study arms on a scale from 0 to 100%, where 0% is the lowest result (the worst quality of life) and 100% is the maximum result (the best quality of life)
Time frame: 12 months
General health perceptions
Comparison of general health perceptions percentage score between both study arms on a scale from 0 to 100%, where 0% is the lowest result (the worst quality of life) and 100% is the maximum result (the best quality of life)
Time frame: 12 months
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.