ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Digitally Enabled AI-Interpreted Salivary Ferning-Based Ovulation Prediction: Feasibility Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFemales with irregular or unpredictable cycles, including those with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), have limited options for validated at-home ovulation prediction. The majority of over-the-counter ovulation prediction kits use urinary luteinizing hormone (LH) indicators that were optimized for those with regular menstrual cycles exhibiting a predictable mid-cycle LH surge. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds potential to address this health deficit via a smartphone-based salivary ferning ovulation test. Research on populations with irregular menstruation and PCOS can be challenging due to the duration and frequency of menstrual cycles.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility for participants with diverse menstrual cycle lengths to complete study tasks designed to train and develop a potential future AI model for salivary ferning-based ovulation prediction.
methodsParticipants were recruited for 2 menstrual cycles where retention, engagement, and adherence were evaluated. Participation entailed remotely collecting and uploading daily data (saliva, LH values), attending lab visits, and returning biological saliva samples.
resultsOf the 133 females recruited from February to October 2023 via targeted patient messages and a public research website, 69 (51.9%) were eligible (age 19-35 years at enrollment, currently menstruating, able to read and comprehend English, weigh more than 110 lb, have an active primary care or gynecological provider, and able to commute to the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) main campus within 10 days of their ovulatory event). Of the 43 (62.3%) eligible participants who consented and completed the baseline survey, the majority were White (n=24, 55.8%), employed (n=33, 76.7%), and highly educated (college or more; n=32, 74.4%) and had a mean BMI of 28.9 (SD 7.8) kg/m
conclusionsTo optimize future scaled participant completion, the study design would include a more targeted recruitment message to address the high ineligibility status, streamline study procedures to ease the participant burden, and incorporate health education to equip participants with ovulatory health information to ameliorate the potential stress impacts of observing anovulation. After optimization, when scaled, this study design could provide an AI model with sufficient data to develop a smartphone-based ovulation predictor specifically tested on females with irregular or unpredictable cycles, including those with PCOS. A well-informed study design is the foundation to AI advancement and femtech (the technology sector focused on enhancing female health) growth, particularity for ovulatory and fertility digital health.
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.