RESEARCH Question: To characterize mobile fertility tracking applications (apps) to determine the use of such apps for women trying to conceive by identifying the fertile window.
Design
An exploratory cross-sectional audit study was conducted of fertility tracking applications. Ninety out of a possible total 200 apps were included for full review. The main outcome measures were the underlying app method for predicting ovulation, the fertile window, or both, price to download and use the app, disclaimers and cautions, information and features provided and tracked, and app marketing strategies.
Results
All the apps except one monitored the women's menstrual cycle dates. Most apps only tracked menstrual cycle dates (n = 49 [54.4%]). The remainder tracked at least one fertility-based awareness method (basal body temperature, cervical mucus, LH) (n = 41 [45.6%]). Twenty-five apps measured dates, basal body temperature, LH and cervical mucus (27.8%). Seventy-six per cent of apps were free to download with free apps having more desirable features, tracking more measures and having more and better quality educational insights than paid apps. Seventy per cent of apps were classified as feminine apps, 41% of which were pink in colour.
Conclusions
Mobile fertility tracking apps are heterogenous in their underlying methods of predicting fertile days, the price to obtain full app functionality, and in content and design. Unreliable calendar apps remain the most commonly available fertility apps on the market. The unregulated nature of fertility apps is a concern that could be addressed by app regulating bodies. The possible benefit of using fertility apps to reduce time to pregnancy needs to be evaluated.
fertility tracking apps fertile window prediction accuracy, mobile application ovulation prediction trying to conceive, fertility awareness app basal body temperature cervical mucus LH, calendar-based fertility apps reliability regulation, cross-sectional audit fertility tracking applications, smartphone apps time to pregnancy conception, fertility app features educational content quality, digital health fertility awareness methods comparison, unregulated fertility apps consumer health concerns, menstrual cycle tracking app ovulation detection methods
PMID 34756400 34756400 DOI 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.09.005 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.09.005
Cite this article
Ali, R., Gurtin, Z., & Harper, J. (2020). Do fertility tracking applications offer women useful information about their fertile window?. Reproductive biomedicine online, 42(1), S1472-6483(20)30509-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.09.005
Ali R, Gurtin Z, Harper J. Do fertility tracking applications offer women useful information about their fertile window?. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020;42(1):S1472-6483(20)30509-5. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.09.005
Ali, Roshonara, et al. "Do fertility tracking applications offer women useful information about their fertile window?." Reproductive biomedicine online, vol. 42, no. 1, 2020, pp. S1472-6483(20)30509-5.
Related articles
Fertility AwarenessApp ComparisonFertile Window IdentificationBBT and Cervical Mucus
The Natural Cycles app employs daily basal body temperature to define the fertile window via a proprietary algorithm and is clinically established effective in preventing pregnancy. We sought to (1) compare the app-defined fertile window of Natural Cycles to that of CycleProGo, an app that uses BBT and cervical mucus to define the fertile window and (2) compare the app-defined fertile windows to the estimated physiologic fertile window. Daily BBT were entered into Natural Cycles from 20 randomly selected regularly cycling women with at least 12 complete cycles from the CycleProGo database. The proportion of cycles with equivalent (±1 cycle day) fertile-window starts and fertile-window ends was determined. The app-defined fertile windows were then compared to the estimated physiologic fertile window using Peak mucus to estimate ovulation. Fifty seven percent of cycles (136/238) had equivalent fertile-window starts and 36% (72/181) had equivalent fertile-window end days. The mean overall fertile-window length from Natural Cycles was 12.8 days compared to 15.1 days for CycleProGo (p < 0.001). The Natural Cycles algorithm declared 12% to 30% of cycles with a fertile-window start and 13% to 38% of cycles with a fertile-window end within the estimated physiologic fertile window. The CycleProGo algorithm declared 4% to 14% of cycles with a fertile-window start and no cycles with a fertile-window end within the estimated physiologic fertile window. Natural Cycles designated a higher proportion of cycles days as infertile within the estimated physiologic fertile window than CycleProGo.
Use of cervical mucus in addition to BBT may improve the accuracy of identifying the fertile window. Additional studies with other markers of ovulation and the fertile window would give additional insight into the clinical implications of app-defined fertile window differences.
Frank-Herrmann P et al., 2017·Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care
Sir,Currently, a variety of start-up companies are developing mobile phone apps to track the menstrual cycle and the fertile window, for the use of women who are trying to conceive or trying to avo...
Physicians who counsel women for preconception concerns are in an excellent position to give advice to couples regarding the optimal timing of intercourse to achieve pregnancy. The currently available evidence suggests that methods that prospectively identify the window of fertility are likely to be more effective for optimally timing intercourse than calendar calculations or basal body temperature. There are several promising methods with good scientific bases to identify the fertile window prospectively. These include fertility charting of vaginal discharge and a commercially available fertility monitor. These methods identify the occurrence of ovulation clinically and also identify a longer window of fertility than urinary luteinizing hormone kits. Prospectively identifying the full window of fertility may lead to higher rates of conception. Proper information given early in the course of trying to achieve pregnancy is likely to reduce time to conception for many couples, and also to reduce unnecessary intervention and cost.
Zegers-Hochschild F et al., 2026·Reproductive Biomedicine Online
What are the trends and effects of assisted reproductive technology (ART) interventions on the effectiveness and safety of ART carried out in Latin America during 2022. Retrospective collection of cycle-based multinational data obtained from ART procedures carried out by 204 accredited institutions in 16 countries. In total 123,265 initiated cycles resulted in 19,663 deliveries and 22,203 births. Use of ART varied greatly, from 643.3 cycles/million inhabitants in Uruguay to 28.8 in Guatemala. In autologous cycles, the proportion of women aged ≥40 years represents 35.1% of cycles, whereas women <34 years represents only 18.8%. The proportion of single embryo transfers (SET) increased from 42.4% in 2021 to 47.3% in 2022. Out of 22,203 babies born, 77.4% were singletons, 21.7% twins and 0.9% triplets or more. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection represented 85.4% of fertilization techniques, and blastocyst transfer increased from 79.3% in 2021 to 85.3% in 2022. Delivery rate after fresh blastocyst elective single embryo transfer (32.6%) was significantly higher than after the transfer of one frozen embryo transfer (FET) from freeze-all cycle (25.2%) (P = 0.0001). The number of aspirations leading to preimplantation genetic testing increased 2.6 times in 6 years, and significantly increased delivery rates/transfer (P ≤ 0.008) and reduced miscarriage at all ages (P ≤ 0.004) in autologous cycles, but not in oocyte donation cycles. Delivery rates after fresh transfer of embryos from vitrified-warmed donated oocytes, generated similar outcome to FET from fresh oocyte donation cycles (P = 0.5621). Perinatal mortality increased from 7.5‰ in singletons to 22.8‰ in twins. Systematic collection of cycle-based multinational data contributes to cooperative sustained development and helps implement evidence-based reproductive decisions.