Mikolajczyk, R. T., & Stanford, J. B. (2005). A new method for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraception that accounts for variation in timing of ovulation and previous cycle length. Fertility and sterility, 83(6), 1764-1770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.097
Mikolajczyk RT, Stanford JB. A new method for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraception that accounts for variation in timing of ovulation and previous cycle length. Fertil Steril. 2005;83(6):1764-1770. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.097
Mikolajczyk, R. T., and J. B. Stanford. "A new method for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraception that accounts for variation in timing of ovulation and previous cycle length." Fertility and sterility, vol. 83, no. 6, 2005, pp. 1764-1770.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
New method cuts bias in simulated emergency contraception trials
A 2005 simulation study built a new way to estimate how well emergency contraception works, using each woman's previous cycle length and the spread in ovulation timing. In simulated trials, the new method gave the least biased estimates of effectiveness. The cycles came from 125 women.
Key Findings
The new method drew on 725 cycles from 125 women. Its fecund window ran 14 days, from day 10 to day 23 counted back from the last day before the next menses.
In simulated trials using the previous cycle's length, the unadjusted Trussell method overestimated a true effectiveness of 50% by a median of 18 percentage points. The new method overestimated it by 3.
In the same simulations at a true effectiveness of 75%, the unadjusted median overestimates were 9 points for the Trussell method, 7 for the Dixon method and 1 for the new method.
With a 28-day cycle assumed for everyone, the median overestimates grew for all methods. At a true 50%, the new method overestimated by 15 points and the Trussell method by 26.
In simulated 5-day exposure frames, every method overestimated effectiveness when intercourse fell early in the cycle and underestimated it when late. The new method gave the least biased results there.
Interpretation
This is a simulation study, so no emergency contraception users were followed. The values of 50% and 75% were assumed. Each scenario ran 1,000 simulations of 120 cycles. The simulated trials reused a subset of the cycles that produced the new daily estimates. The authors call the results preliminary and ask for replication with other data sets. The paper reports no real-world effectiveness for any product.
RRM Context
The daily pregnancy probabilities came from natural family planning users, and their charted peak mucus day marked ovulation. Fertility awareness charting records a sign of ovulation in each cycle. The authors say cycle length alone leaves uncertainty about the day of ovulation. They suggest follicular ultrasound or a hormonal marker could predict it more precisely still.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Abstract
Objective
To develop a new method for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraception (EC) by using information about previous menstrual cycle length, accounting for the variation in the day of ovulation within the menstrual cycle, and comparing the validity of the new and previous methods.
Methods
Secondary analysis of a data set with a biological marker of ovulation and its distribution in the cycle. Based on a sample of cycles with known length and a known biological marker of ovulation, we simulated trials of predetermined EC effectiveness and then calculated estimates of EC effectiveness based on old and new methods.
Results
Under some conditions, all methods produced biased estimates of effectiveness with simulated trials, especially when the actual effectiveness was low. The systematic bias was minimized with the new method. The new method was robust with regard to the distribution of the day of intercourse in women presenting for EC.
Conclusions
Future studies of EC effectiveness should consider both the uncertainty in predicting the day of ovulation and previous cycle length. Our estimates of daily fecundity should be replicated with other data sets.
Minjeur M et al., 2026·Journal of Restorative Reproductive Medicine·Free to read
Infertility is a clinical condition that is recognized by the symptom of an inability to conceive through sexual intercourse or to sustain a pregnancy, with that symptom indicating underlying male and/or female pathology.
This definition of infertility was developed through a structured, consensus-informed process involving broad stakeholder engagement. Initially, multiple definitions currently used by various medical professional organizations were reviewed, and a definition document was drafted and submitted to the Board of Directors of the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine (IIRRM). All IIRRM members were invited to provide feedback on the draft. Approximately 2,500 individuals and 44 organizations from 92 countries were then invited to review the proposed document, representing clinical, scientific, patient, policy, and advocacy perspectives. Submitted comments were reviewed thematically, with suggested revisions evaluated for clarity, clinical relevance, inclusiveness, and consistency with contemporary restorative reproductive medicine. Following this review, 3 substantive changes, 18 minor changes, and 15 citation corrections were incorporated into the final draft which resulted in a revised definition intended to better reflect the medical, social, and practical realities of modern infertility evaluation and care. Final approval by the IIRRM Board of Directors was unanimous.
Kahn LG et al., 2026·JAMA Network Open·Free full text on PubMed Central
Increasing numbers of children are conceived using infertility treatment; concerns remain about potential effects on child neurodevelopment. To evaluate whether infertility treatment is associated with child neurodevelopment and whether such an association may be attributable to underlying subfecundity. DESIGN, SETTING, This cohort study was conducted among mother-child dyads in the National Institutes of Health Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) Cohort, with infants conceived between 1998 and 2022. Associations of subfecundity and infertility treatment with neurodevelopmental outcomes were assessed among children ages 2 to 10 years. Data were analyzed from May 14, 2025, to March 31, 2026. Subfecundity was defined as prior consultation for, treatment of, or diagnosis of infertility for either partner; at least 2 prior miscarriages; or ever having had unprotected heterosexual intercourse for 12 months without conceiving. Infertility treatment was categorized as in vitro fertilization (IVF) or non-IVF treatment. Harmonized caregiver responses to the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and the Child Behavior Checklist yielded continuous raw scores for externalizing and internalizing problems. The total raw Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) score quantified autism-like symptoms. Caregivers reported physician diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Among 15 382 mother-infant dyads, there were 14 191 unique maternal participants (mean [SD] age at delivery, 30.9 [5.33] years; 8780 parous participants [57.1%]). ASD and ADHD were diagnosed in 876 offspring (7.6%) and 819 offspring (7.1%), respectively. In generalized linear models, subfecundity was associated with higher externalizing problem and SRS scores among all pregnancies (externalizing problems: b = 0.47 [95% CI, 0.14-0.81]; SRS score: b = 1.08 [95% CI, 0.01-2.14]) and when restricted to natural conceptions (externalizing problems: b = 0.45 [95% CI, 0.07-0.83]; SRS score: b = 1.12 [95% CI, -0.09 to 2.34]). Offspring of parents with subfecundity had higher odds of ASD (overall: odds ratio [OR], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.03-1.57]; natural conceptions: OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.04-1.64]). Children conceived via non-IVF treatment had higher odds of ADHD compared with those conceived via natural conception with subfecundity (OR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.16-2.68]) or without subfecundity (OR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.05-2.25]). There were no significant associations for IVF treatment. In this large US cohort study, subfecundity was associated with elevated scores for caregiver-reported symptoms of behavioral problems and higher odds of ASD diagnosis, independent of infertility treatment. Non-IVF treatment was associated with ADHD, warranting further research into specific indications for treatment that may increase risk of offspring neurodevelopmental problems.
Stanford JB et al., 2026·Frontiers in Reproductive Health·Free full text on PubMed Central
Background The total fertility rate (TFR) in most developed countries has been declining for decades. In the United States (U.S.), the total fertility rate has remained below replacement level since 2007. Subfertility affects at least 15% of women or couples over their reproductive lifespan and contributes to reduced TFR. Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) is a medically based approach to subfertility care that can be delivered in primary care settings to increase live birth rates. Objective To estimate the theoretical impact of use of RRM among subfertile couples in the United States. Methods We conducted a simulation study. Model inputs included the number of women of reproductive age in the United States by 5-year age groups; current age-specific and total fertility rates; the proportion of women in each age group with subfertility; estimated spontaneous live birth rates among women with subfertility; and age-specific crude live birth rates with RRM treatment. We evaluated fifteen scenarios including sensitivity analyses: two different varying assumptions for spontaneous conception (25% vs. 50%), two levels of RRM utilization among subfertile women (20% vs. 50%), three different estimates of the number of subfertile women who would be potentially eligible for RRM treatment, and 4 different levels of effectiveness (live birth) from RRM treatment. Results The baseline TFR in the United States was 1.77 during 2015-2019, and 13.5% of women ages 20-44 were estimated to have subfertility. In a conservative scenario (50% spontaneous births; 20% RRM utilization; married women trying to conceive for at least 12 months, 20.7% RRM live births), the TFR increased to 1.79, representing a 1.0% relative increase (absolute +0.02). In an optimistic scenario (25% spontaneous births; 50% RRM utilization; all subfertile women), the TFR increased to 2.02, a 14.5% relative increase (absolute +0.26), approaching replacement-level fertility. Conclusion Simulation results suggest that expanding access to RRM within primary care settings could meaningfully increase the U.S. TFR, by reducing unresolved subfertility. Realizing this potential would require policy and health system changes to address workforce capacity, insurance coverage, and equitable access. These findings underscore the potential contribution of non-IVF fertility care pathways in addressing population-level fertility decline.
Mikolajczyk RT et al., 2006·Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol
Approaches to measuring fecundity include the assessment of time to pregnancy and day-specific probabilities of conception (daily fecundities) indexed to a day of ovulation. In this paper, we develop an additional approach of calculating expected pregnancies based on daily fecundities indexed to the last day of the menstrual cycle. Expected pregnancies can thus be calculated while controlling for frequency and timing of coitus. Comparing observed pregnancies with expected pregnancies allows for a standardised comparison of fecundity between studies or groups within studies, and can be used to assess the effects of categorical covariates on the woman or couple level, and also on the cycle level. This can be accomplished in a minimal data set that does not necessarily require hormonal measurement or the explicit identification of ovulation. We demonstrate this approach by examining the effects of age and parity on fecundity in a data set from women monitoring their fertility cycles with the Creighton Model FertilityCare System.
The contraceptive efficacy of emergency contraceptive pills containing levonorgestrel (LNG-EC) has been estimated in most previous studies by judging the day of ovulation from presumptive menstrual cycle data, thus providing poorly reliable estimates. In the present study, the efficacy of LNG-EC was determined in 393 cycles by dating ovulation on the basis of reliable hormonal and ovarian parameters validated by a database constructed in a separate study. In addition, the efficacy was determined separately for cycles in which LNG-EC was given before or after ovulation. For the 148 women who had sexual intercourse during the fertile days, the overall accumulated probability of pregnancy was 24.7, while altogether 8 pregnancies were observed. Thus, the overall contraceptive efficacy of LNG-EC was 68%. Among the 103 women who took LNG-EC before ovulation (days -5 to -1), 16 pregnancies were expected and no pregnancy occurred (p<.0001). Among the 45 women who took LNG-EC on the day of ovulation (day 0) or thereafter, 8 pregnancies occurred and 8.7 were expected (p=1.00). These findings are incompatible with the inhibition of implantation by LNG-EC in women. The same cases were also analyzed using the presumptive menstrual cycle data, and important discrepancies were detected between the two methods. The efficacy of LNG-EC has been overestimated in studies using presumptive menstrual cycle data. Our results confirm previous similar studies and demonstrate that LNG-EC does not prevent embryo implantation and therefore cannot be labeled as abortifacient.
To model the effectiveness that can be obtained if levonorgestrel-only emergency contraception (EC) acts only through disrupting ovulation, in relation to other effects that may occur before or after fertilization and accounting for delays in administration. We modeled follicular growth as a function of follicular size, using known day-specific probabilities of conception and known disruption of ovulation by levonorgestrel-only EC, to estimate the expected effectiveness of EC. Combined data from multiple clinical studies. PATIENT(S): Simulation models. INTERVENTION(S): Disruption of ovulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Effectiveness in the form of proportion of pregnancies prevented. RESULT(S): With disruption of ovulation alone, the potential effectiveness of levonorgestrel EC ranged from 49% (no delay) to 8% (72-hour delay). With complete inhibition of fertilization before the day of ovulation, the potential effectiveness of levonorgestrel EC ranged from 90% (no delay) to 16% (72-hour delay). CONCLUSION(S): The gap between effectiveness of levonorgestrel EC estimated from clinical studies and what can be attributed to disruption of ovulation may be explained by overestimation of actual effectiveness and supplementary mechanisms of action, including postfertilization effects. Additional data with follicular ultrasound and precise measures of delay between intercourse and EC administration would yield greater insight into effectiveness and mechanisms of action.
Research Methods › Measurement and Statistics › Statistical Methods · Fertility Awareness › Effectiveness › Typical and Perfect Use
Joseph B Stanford
Joe Stanford, Joey Stanford, J Stanford
PMID 15950649 15950649 DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.097 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.097 Mikolajczyk et al. 2005, Mikolajczyk 2005
Cite this article
Mikolajczyk, R. T., & Stanford, J. B. (2005). A new method for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraception that accounts for variation in timing of ovulation and previous cycle length. Fertility and sterility, 83(6), 1764-1770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.097
Mikolajczyk RT, Stanford JB. A new method for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraception that accounts for variation in timing of ovulation and previous cycle length. Fertil Steril. 2005;83(6):1764-1770. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.097
Mikolajczyk, R. T., and J. B. Stanford. "A new method for estimating the effectiveness of emergency contraception that accounts for variation in timing of ovulation and previous cycle length." Fertility and sterility, vol. 83, no. 6, 2005, pp. 1764-1770.