The State of PMOS Research
Mapping PMOS (formerly PCOS) research across the globe for researchers, clinicians, patients and funders. The picture that emerges is a field that is large and growing, yet structurally misaligned with the disease it studies: under-resourced, fragmented across specialist silos, and concentrated in a handful of countries.
An estimated 8–13% of women of reproductive age worldwide live with PMOS and up to 70% are undiagnosed. WHO, 2023 ↗
What the data shows
Publication output has grown 3.4× since 2015, yet the share of papers acknowledging any funder has stayed flat near 25.3%.
See the funding data50% of research treats individual symptoms in specialist silos; only 29.7% investigates the root cause.
See how it is studiedFive countries produce 52% of the world's PMOS research, and most of it never crosses a border (only 13.7% of papers involve more than one country).
See the geographyThe shape of the field
Five countries produce more than half of all output. The field rarely crosses borders. Mental Health research stands nearly in isolation from every other topic.
Top Research Topics
Top Countries by Output
Most isolated topics
Share of each topic's papers that carry no other topic tag, i.e. studied on their own rather than alongside another field.
Mental Health & Psychology research is twice as siloed as any other topic, rarely connecting with the rest of the field.
How concentrated is the field?
Output is geographically concentrated; most PMOS research stays within national borders.
Conditions co-investigated with PMOS · Top 10
How often each condition is mentioned alongside PMOS in the literature, a map of what the field connects to clinically. This reflects co-mention, not whether the condition was the study's primary focus.
How is it funded?
Three-quarters of PMOS papers acknowledge no funder. That figure is itself an undercount: many funded papers omit acknowledgements. Of those that do disclose, a handful of national agencies dominate, and the acknowledged-funded share has not kept pace with publication growth.
A share that has held flat for a decade despite a 3.4× rise in total publications. 192 funded papers in 2015, 688 in 2025.
1,422 of 2,501 funders back just one PMOS paper. The landscape is top-heavy: a few dominant agencies and thousands of one-shot contributions.
Funded % by Topic
Funding Trend · 2015 to 2025
What kind of research is it?
Half of PMOS research investigates individual symptoms in specialist silos. Only 30% looks at root causes. The fastest-growing areas (microbiome, molecular mechanisms, animal models) are starting to change that.
Research Approach · Root Cause vs Symptom Specific
Research treating one manifestation of PMOS in a specialist silo: fertility treatments, dermatology (hirsutism, acne), mental-health interventions, hormone management, diet, and exercise. Each tackles a single symptom rather than the underlying condition.
Topics in this bucket: fertility, dermatology, mental health, hormones, diet, exercise.
Methodological and translational work connecting root-cause understanding to clinical care: diagnostic criteria, drug development, population epidemiology, and animal models. The infrastructure that lets the other two buckets do their work.
Topics in this bucket: diagnostics, treatment, epidemiology, animal models.
Research investigating why PMOS happens: biological mechanisms, genetic drivers, microbiome interactions, inflammatory processes, and metabolic root causes. Looks at the condition as a whole rather than treating individual symptoms.
Topics in this bucket: genetics, mechanisms, microbiome, inflammation, metabolic.
Inner ring = the 3 research-approach buckets. Outer ring = the 15 topics, each sized by article count and grouped under its bucket. Hover any segment for details.
Topic Momentum · Share Change 2015–17 → 2023–25
Where burden outpaces research
PMOS is globally under-researched. This map shows where the gap between disease burden and research output is widest, and which countries carry burden the research has yet to reach.
Research vs Disease Burden
Largest research gaps
Gap score = disease burden percentile minus research intensity percentile. Bar colour follows the income group legend above.
How to read this chart
Y axis caveat: DALY rates reflect diagnostic capacity as much as disease biology. Countries with weaker health systems record fewer diagnoses, so low DALY in the bottom cluster often signals invisible burden, not absent burden.
GBD scope: these DALYs cover only direct PMOS symptoms (infertility, irregular cycles, hormonal disability). Metabolic, cardiovascular, and mental health consequences are attributed to those GBD categories, so total burden is understated (Safiri et al., Hum Reprod 2022).
Disease burden: GBD 2021 (IHME) via Yao et al., PLOS ONE 2025. Research: publications 2019–2025, countries with ≥20 papers. Income groups: World Bank FY2022.
About the data
Full metadata, abstracts, and concepts. 2015–2025 coverage.
NCBI Entrez esummary. Adds articles missing from OpenAlex. 9,999 merged by DOI.
3-tier pipeline (concepts → keywords → Claude Haiku). 99.99% coverage.
Each article splits equally across its topics, so totals sum to article count, not tag count.
Known limitations (7)
- Coverage, language and scope. English search terms under-index non-English and regional journals. Social science and qualitative research on PMOS sits largely out of frame.
- Country reflects author affiliation, not where patients or data come from.
- Topics and research approach are modelled. The root-cause / symptom / bridging split is an interpretive mapping, not ground truth.
- Funding is undercounted and unpriced. Acknowledgement varies by journal and sector; no monetary amounts are available.
- Disease burden is understated. GBD 2021 omits metabolic, cardiovascular, and mental health consequences of PMOS.
- Comorbidities are co-mentions, not confirmed comorbidities or primary study focus.
- The data is a snapshot. One-time extract, English language only; not continuously updated.