Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32003426›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2020

Seasonal patterns in fecundability in North America and Denmark: a preconception cohort study.

Amelia K Wesselink, Lauren A Wise, Elizabeth E Hatch, Ellen M Mikkelsen, Henrik T Sørensen, Anders H Riis, Craig J McKinnon, Kenneth J Rothman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Effects of different seasons on the outcome ofFrontiers in reproductive health · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Seasonal variations of menstrual cycle length in a large, US-based, digital cohort.International journal of hygiene and environmental health · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Seasonal fluctuation of in vitro fertilization encounters in the United States.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Amelia K WesselinkDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Lauren A WiseDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Elizabeth E HatchDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Ellen M MikkelsenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Henrik T SørensenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Anders H RiisDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Craig J McKinnonDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Kenneth J RothmanDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

An internet-based preconception cohort study in North America and DenmarkR01HD086742 · NICHD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI LAUREN A WISE · 2016 to 2026
$6.7M
An internet based prospective study of time to pregnancyR01HD060680 · NICHD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI HATCH, ELIZABETH E · 2010 to 2014
$2.6M
A Pilot Study Of Internet Recruitment and follow-up among Reproductive Age WomenR21HD050264 · NICHD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI HATCH, ELIZABETH E · 2006 to 2007
$399k
Feasibility of an internet-based study of time-to-pregnancy in the United StatesR21HD072326 · NICHD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI WISE, LAUREN A · 2013 to 2014
$337k
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD060680NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD086742NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD050264NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD072326
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionTo what extent does fecundability vary across seasons? SUMMARY ANSWER: After accounting for seasonal patterns in pregnancy planning, we observed higher fecundability in the fall and lower fecundability in the spring, particularly at lower latitudes. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In human populations, there are strong seasonal patterns of births that vary across geographic regions and time periods. However, previous studies of seasonality and fecundity are limited because they examine season of birth rather than season of conception and therefore neglect to account for seasonal variation in initiating attempts to conceive or pregnancy loss or differences in gestational length. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted a preconception cohort study of 14 331 women residing in North America (June 2013-May 2018: n = 5827) and Denmark (June 2007-May 2018: n = 8504). Participants were attempting to conceive without fertility treatment and had been attempting pregnancy for ≤6 menstrual cycles at enrolment. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIAL, SETTING,

methodsWe collected information on season of each pregnancy attempt using last menstrual period dates over the study period. Pregnancy was reported on female bi-monthly follow-up questionnaires. We fit log-binomial models with trigonometric regression to examine periodic variation in fecundability. We accounted for seasonal variation in initiation of pregnancy attempts by including indicator variables for menstrual cycle of attempt in the regression models. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Initiation of pregnancy attempts peaked in September, with stronger seasonality in North America than in Denmark (48 vs. 16% higher probability initiating attempts in September compared with March). After accounting for seasonal variation in initiation of pregnancy attempts, we observed modest seasonal variation in fecundability, with a peak in the late fall and early winter in both cohorts, but stronger peak/low ratios in North America (1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05, 1.28) than in Denmark (1.08; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.16). When we stratified the North American data by latitude, we observed the strongest seasonal variation in the southern USA (peak/low ratio of 1.45 [95% CI: 1.14, 1.84]), with peak fecundability in late November. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We estimated menstrual cycle dates between follow-up questionnaires, which may have introduced exposure misclassification, particularly when women skipped follow-up questionnaires. We were unable to measure seasonally varying factors that may have influenced fecundability, including ambient temperature, vitamin D levels or infectious disease. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsAn understanding of how fecundability varies across seasons could help identify factors that can impair reproductive function. Neglecting to account for seasonal variation in initiation of pregnancy attempts could bias estimates of seasonal patterns in fecundability. This is the first preconception cohort study to examine seasonal variation in fecundability after accounting for seasonality in initiation of pregnancy attempts. Fecundability was highest in the fall and lowest in the spring, with stronger effects in southern latitudes of North America, suggesting that seasonal exposures may affect fecundity. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Eunice K. Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R21-050264, R01-HD060680, R21-HD072326 and R01-HD086742) and the Danish Medical Research Council (271-07-0338). The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Indexed as

Time-to-PregnancyChildCohort StudiesDenmarkFemaleHumansNorth AmericaPregnancyProspective StudiesSeasonsfecundabilityfertilityinternet-based studypreconception cohortseasonseasonality

Identifiers

PMID32003426
PMCPMC8204656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.