ArticleFertility and sterility2019
Fecundability in relation to use of fertility awareness indicators in a North American preconception cohort study.
Article in Fertility and sterility, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- A randomized trial of web-based fertility-tracking software and fecundability.Fertility and sterility · 2023Trial
- Application of machine learning to predict delayed fecundability among women in sub-Saharan Africa.Reproduction & fertility · 2025Article
- Lifestyle Modifications Prior to Pregnancy and Their Impact on Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes: A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Racial and ethnic disparities in fecundability: a North American preconception cohort study.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Oura Ring as a Tool for Ovulation Detection: Validation Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The association between the use of fertility indicators and fecundability in a Danish preconception cohort.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2024Article
- Novel Methodology for Identifying the Occurrence of Ovulation by Estimating Core Body Temperature During Sleeping: Validity and Effectiveness Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Current Ovulation and Luteal Phase Tracking Methods and Technologies for Fertility and Family Planning: A Review.Seminars in reproductive medicine · 2024Review
- Survey Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Menstrual Cycle Tracking Technologies.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Tracking of menstrual cycles and prediction of the fertile window via measurements of basal body temperature and heart rate as well as machine-learning algorithms.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2022Observational
- Use of fertility awareness methods as a component of safer conception for women in HIV-serodifferent relationships in Kenya.Reproductive health · 2021Article
- Sporadic anovulation is not an important determinant of becoming pregnant and time to pregnancy among eumenorrheic women: A simulation study.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2021Article
- Fecundability in relation to use of mobile computing apps to track the menstrual cycle.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2020Observational
- Predictors of Fertility-Awareness-Based Method Use Among Women Trying to Conceive and Women Contemplating Pregnancy.Nursing researchArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo quantify the frequency of use of selected fertility awareness indicators and to assess their influence on fecundability.
designWeb-based prospective cohort study.
settingNot applicable. PATIENT(S): Female pregnancy planners, aged 21-45 years, attempting conception for ≤6 cycles at study entry. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We ascertained time to pregnancy, in menstrual cycles, with bimonthly questionnaires. We estimated adjusted fecundability ratios (FRs) and confidence intervals (CIs) using proportional probabilities models, controlling for age, income, education, smoking, intercourse frequency, and other lifestyle and reproductive factors. RESULT(S): A total of 5,688 women were analyzed, with a mean age of 29.9 years and mean time trying of 2.1 cycles at baseline; 30% had ever been pregnant. At baseline, 75% were using one or more fertility indicators (counting days or charting menstrual cycles [71%], measuring basal body temperature [BBT, 21%], monitoring cervical fluid [39%], using urine LH tests [32%], or feeling for changes in position of the cervix [12%]). Women using any fertility indicator at baseline had higher subsequent fecundability (adjusted FR 1.25, 95% CI 1.16-1.35) than those not using any fertility indicators. For each individual indicator, adjusted FRs ranged from 1.28-1.36, where 1.00 would indicate no relation with fecundability. The adjusted FR for women using a combination of charting days, cervical fluid, and urine LH was 1.48 (95% CI 1.31-1.67) relative to women using no fertility indicators. CONCLUSION(S): In a North American preconception cohort study, use of fertility indicators indicating the fertile window was common, and was associated with greater fecundability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.