The association between the use of fertility indicators and fecundability in a Danish preconception cohort

Author:

Pedersen Emma Skovgaard1ORCID,Mikkelsen Ellen M.1ORCID,Sørensen Henrik Toft1ORCID,Hatch Elizabeth E.2ORCID,Wise Lauren A.2ORCID,Rothman Kenneth J.2ORCID,Stanford Joseph B.3ORCID,Laursen Anne Sofie Dam1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital Aarhus University Aarhus N Denmark

2. Boston University School of Public Health Boston Massachusetts USA

3. Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine University of Utah Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine Salt Lake City Utah USA

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe use of fertility indicators to predict ovulation has largely been studied for contraceptive purposes, while less so as fertility‐promoting tools.ObjectiveTo investigate the association between fertility indicators and fecundability in Danish women trying to conceive.MethodsWeb‐based preconception cohort study. We analysed data from 11,328 females aged 18–49 years trying to conceive without fertility treatment for ≤6 menstrual cycles, from the Danish SnartGravid.dk and SnartForældre.dk cohorts (2007–2023). Participants reported the use of fertility indicators (counting days since the last menstrual period, cervical fluid monitoring, urinary ovulation testing, feeling ovulation, using a smartphone fertility app and measuring basal body temperature [BBT]). Time to pregnancy was measured in menstrual cycles ascertained by self‐reported pregnancy status. We estimated fecundability ratios (FR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using proportional probabilities regression models adjusted for age, socio‐economic position, health indicators, reproductive history and gynaecological factors.ResultsFertility indicators were used by 63.3% of participants at study entry. Counting days was the most common (46.9%), while measuring BBT was the least (3.0%). Other indicators ranged from 17.0% to 23.6%, with 69.7% using more than one indicator. Compared with non‐use, use of any fertility indicator was associated with greater fecundability (adjusted FR 1.14, 95% CI 1.08, 1.19). Cervical fluid monitoring showed the strongest association (aFR 1.46, 95% CI 1.03, 2.07), followed by urinary ovulation testing (aFR 1.35, 95% CI 1.16, 1.58) and counting days (aFR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09, 1.29). Feeling ovulation and fertility apps were modestly associated with fecundability, while measuring BBT was not associated. Sensitivity analysis restricting to ≤2 cycles of attempt time and two cycles of follow‐up showed an aFR for any indicator use of 1.21 (95% CI 1.13, 1.31).ConclusionIn this Danish preconception cohort, use of fertility indicators was associated with a higher fecundability, varying by type of indicator.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3