ArticleBMC women's health2023
Understanding the perspective of women who use the Billings Ovulation Method®: a focus group study.
Article in BMC women's health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Billings Ovulation Method®(the Billings Method) is a fertility awareness-based method (FABM) of family planning that relies on the observation of patterns of fertility and infertility based on vulvar sensations and appearance of discharges. This allows people to choose when to have intercourse, depending on whether they want to avoid or achieve pregnancy. Few studies have documented user experiences with FABMs.
methodsWe conducted four virtual focus groups (FGs) in May and June 2021 with current adult women users of the Billings Method. We asked questions about users' reasons for selecting a FABM and the Billings Method, positive experiences and challenges learning and using the Billings Method, and suggestions for improving the user experience. We performed a content analysis of the transcribed FGs to explore key themes from the discussions. COREQ guidelines were followed.
resultsTwenty women between the ages of 23 and 43 participated in the FGs. Reasons women described choosing a FABM included to follow religious beliefs, to avoid side effects of hormonal contraception, and/or to learn more about their bodies. Reasons for selecting the Billings Method included perceiving it as more precise and easier to understand than other FABMs, having a scientific basis, and being recommended by family and friends. Experiences related to learning and using the Billings Method were mainly positive. They included finding the method easy to use and learn, successfully using it to either postpone or achieve a pregnancy and increasing their awareness of their bodies. Challenges for participants included the inherent learning curve for identifying sensations at the vulva and the required periods of abstinence. Participants provided suggestions and recommendations for improving users' experience, including raising awareness of the Billings Method among healthcare providers.
conclusionsUsers of the Billings Method expressed an overall positive experience when learning and using it for family planning and body awareness. Some challenges were identified that offer opportunities to improve how the Billings Method is taught and delivered. These findings can also enhance healthcare providers' interactions with FABM users, including those of the Billings Method.
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.