Fertility Awareness · Effectiveness

Current Medical Research: Winter/Spring 2017

Fehring RJ, Raviele K

Published July 5, 2018 The Linacre Quarterly, 85(1), 74-85
DOI 10.1177/0024363918756392 PMID 29970939 PMC PMC6027111
Read our synopsis

RRM Academy Synopsis

Correct-Use Pregnancy Rates Stay Low With Online Fertility Charting

A doctor reviewed 2016 and 2017 fertility studies. One study followed 1,530 women who charted their cycles with an online tool to find fertile days. Correct-use pregnancy rates reached 3.4 per 100 users after 24 cycles of charting.

Key Findings

  • The online charting program's correct-use pregnancy rate was 2.5 per 100 women at 12 cycles and 3.4 per 100 at 24 cycles, among 1,530 participants.
  • A subgroup of 663 non-breastfeeding women had a correct-use pregnancy rate of 1.6 per 100 women at both 12 and 24 months of use.
  • A national fertility committee found most couples, 80 percent, become pregnant within six months of trying, and female fertility declines notably by age 35.
  • A meta-analysis of 10 trials in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage found progestogens may lower miscarriage risk (RR 0.72, CI 0.53-0.97) and raise live births (RR 1.07, CI 1.02-1.15).
  • A Cochrane review of 8 trials (55,157 participants) found no school-based sexual education program improved STIs or pregnancy; the authors found little evidence for curriculum programs.

Interpretation

This is a doctor's review of several separate 2016 and 2017 studies. The featured online program study enrolled women who signed up on their own through NFP groups. Most were Catholic, college-educated, and of European-American background, which makes it hard to know how well the pregnancy rates apply to other groups of women. The reviewer also adds personal opinions next to each study summary; some lines are the reviewer's own opinions, separate from the study's findings. The miscarriage and sex-education findings come from other trials and reviews, unrelated to the charting study.

RRM Context

This review is part of the fertility awareness research that RRM clinicians use. The charting study tested an online-only NFP method and did not test care from a NaPro-trained doctor. The fertility guideline and miscarriage findings come from general reproductive medicine, separate from fertility awareness studies. They add a wider backdrop for this kind of care.

Abstract not indexed.

Topics

By this author

Related research

Fertility Awareness › Effectiveness › Comparative Effectiveness · Contraception › Long Acting Methods › Intrauterine Devices · Ethics and Policy › Reproductive Ethics › Conscience Protections
Richard J Fehring, Kathleen Raviele
Rick Fehring, Dick Fehring, Rich Fehring, R Fehring, K Raviele
PMID 29970939 29970939 DOI 10.1177/0024363918756392 10.1177/0024363918756392 Fehring et al. 2018, Fehring 2018

Cite this article

Fehring, R. J., & Raviele, K. (2018). Current Medical Research: Winter/Spring 2017. The Linacre Quarterly, 85(1), 74-85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0024363918756392