Enrollment, Childbearing Motivations, and Intentions of Couples in the Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) Study
Stanford, J. B., & Porucznik, C. A. (2017). Enrollment, Childbearing Motivations, and Intentions of Couples in the Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) Study. Frontiers in medicine, 4, 147. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2017.00147
Stanford JB, Porucznik CA. Enrollment, Childbearing Motivations, and Intentions of Couples in the Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) Study. Front Med (Lausanne). 2017;4:147. doi:10.3389/fmed.2017.00147
Stanford, J. B., and C. A. Porucznik. "Enrollment, Childbearing Motivations, and Intentions of Couples in the Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) Study." Frontiers in medicine, vol. 4, 2017, pp. 147.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
Open access
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
New Creighton Model couples report high desire for children
Couples starting the Creighton Model to avoid pregnancy report high motivation to have children. This prospective cohort enrolled 305 women and 290 male partners at 17 centers in the US and Canada, mostly Catholic couples. In this cohort, about 3 out of 4 women and men definitely wanted a child or another child.
Key Findings
Of 1,132 couples seen, 1,090 (96%) were screened and 429 (39%) were eligible. Enrolled were 305 women (71% of eligible) and 290 male partners (95%).
Among 704 excluded women, 418 (59.4%) were planning to conceive and 335 (47.6%) had infertility or a past procedure to help conceive. Ineligible couples could have several reasons.
Women gave these top reasons for learning the method: it is natural (91.2%), moral, ethical or religious reasons (70.3%), no side effects (70.7%), and insight into cycle and fertility (61.9%).
The mean positive childbearing motivation score was 3.3 for women and men (scale 1 to 4). A 1995 California study of married couples reported 2.9 for women and 2.8 for men.
At entry, 208 of 272 women (76.4%) and 179 of 243 men (73.7%) said they definitely wanted a child or another child.
Interpretation
The paper reports baseline questionnaires from a prospective cohort, before any follow-up. Couples trying to conceive, or with past fertility problems, were excluded. Enrolled couples were younger and more often engaged, college educated and Catholic than couples at the same centers who did not enroll. Eighty percent of the enrolled women were Roman Catholic. The California comparison couples were married and somewhat older and wealthier. The paper reports no pregnancy outcomes. The authors plan later analyses of how desires, intentions and behaviors relate to pregnancy.
RRM Context
The Creighton Model FertilityCare System was further developed by Dr. Thomas W. Hilgers and colleagues to teach couples to record signs of fertility. The authors write that fertility awareness-based methods serve couples avoiding pregnancy and couples trying to conceive. Many, perhaps most, long-term users move between the two. In this cohort, 59% of excluded women were learning the method to conceive. An earlier study of eight centers, from 1996 to 2000, found 19% of new users trying to conceive.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Abstract
Context
The Creighton Model FertilityCare(TM) System (CrM) is a standardized approach for educating women about the biomarkers of their fertility. Couples can use this information for timing intercourse during "fertile" or "infertile" days in order to try to conceive or to avoid pregnancy.
Objectives
The study of Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) was conducted to assess fertility motivations, intentions, fertility-related sexual behaviors, and their impact on effectiveness to avoid and to conceive among new users of the CrM. This paper reports enrollment baseline characteristics.
Design and Setting
We conducted this prospective cohort study at 17 CrM FertilityCare(TM) Centers; 16 in the USA and one in Toronto, Canada.
Materials and Methods
Couples who were new or returning users of the CrM were eligible. Couples who were initially trying to conceive or had a history of subfertility were excluded. Couples were enrolled and followed prospectively by their CrM instructors and also by CEIBA study staff. They completed baseline questionnaires.
Results
1,132 new couples were assessed; 1,090 (96%) couples were screened; 429 (39%) couples were eligible; 305 women (71%) and 290 (95%) male partners were enrolled. The majority of women was engaged (39%) or married (51%), college graduates (77%), Caucasian non-Hispanic (80%), and Roman Catholic (80%). The most common reasons for learning CrM (women) were to use a natural method for family planning (91%), for moral/ethical/religious reasons (70%), the lack of side effects (71%), or insight into the menstrual cycle and fertility (62%). Women and men intended to have a mean of three and two additional children, respectively. Of women, 21% intended to have a child within a year and 60% between 1 and 3 years. The mean positive childbearing motivation score was 3.3 for both women and men (range 1-4, with 4 being most positive).
Conclusion
Couples beginning use of the CrM to avoid pregnancy have high levels of motivation, desire, and intention for future childbearing. The CEIBA study has prospective measures of desires, intentions, and sexual/fertility behaviors for up to 1 year. We will assess the impact of desires, intentions, and behaviors on the pregnancy rates among these couples.
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.
Stanford JB et al., 2025·PLoS One·Free full text on PubMed Central
Knowledge of the fertile and infertile phases of the menstrual cycle can be applied to conceive or to avoid pregnancy. Fertility intentions and sexual behaviors during the fertile time may influence whether and when pregnancy occurs. The Creighton Model FertilityCare System (CrMS) is a specific system of fertility appreciation used to conceive or to avoid pregnancy. The objective of this paper is to report intentions, behaviors, and pregnancy rates during use of the CrMS among couples who initially intended to avoid pregnancy.Data and methods We analyzed a prospective cohort study conducted in 17 CrMS centers across the USA and Canada, following 296 couples for up to one year after onset of initial use of the CrMS to avoid pregnancy. Baseline data included demographics, motivations, and pregnancy intentions for each partner. Couples contributed 2894 menstrual cycles, most of which had data collected (by questionnaires and daily diary) on cycle-specific pregnancy intentions, days of potential fertility, and fertility behaviors. Pregnancies were prospectively actively ascertained. We found a high concordance (91%) in cycle pregnancy intentions between partners. However, 44% of cycles with strong intentions to avoid pregnancy included intercourse on potentially fertile days or days of undetermined fertility status. Across all sensitivity scenarios, cumulative 13-cycle pregnancy rates with cycle intention to conceive ranged from 88.0% to 89.8%, and cumulative 13-cycle pregnancy rates with cycle intention to avoid ranged from 29.1% to 35.3%. In multivariate analysis, baseline motivations and intentions for pregnancy within 2 years were strongly correlated with the likelihood of pregnancy, more so than cycle intentions. The findings suggest that in some populations using natural family planning, baseline motivations and intentions may be more strongly related to pregnancy rates than cycle intentions. Our findings also highlight essential elements for evaluating correct use, including complete recording of intercourse and its timing.
Smith KR et al., 2014·Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol·Free full text on PubMed Central
The Creighton Model FertilityCare System (CrMS) teaches women to identify days when intercourse is likely to result in pregnancy. We sought to assess the impact of the CrMS on time to pregnancy (TTP), via per-cycle pregnancy rates (fecundability). We conducted a parallel randomised trial at the University of Utah School of Medicine, 2003-06. Women ages 18-35 years, in a relationship of proven fertility, who desired to conceive, were block-randomised and stratified for age, with allocation concealment by opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. The control group received the advice to have intercourse 2-3 times per week, and the intervention group received CrMS instruction. All women were asked to begin trying to conceive starting the second cycle in the study and were followed actively up to seven cycles, without blinding of research personnel. We calculated descriptive statistics and fecundability, and estimated Cox models for TTP. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00161395). There were 143 women randomised: 71 to the control group (all analysed) and 72 to the CrMS group (69 analysed). The adjusted hazard ratio for the influence of CrMS on TTP was 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53, 1.38]. Fecundability in cycles with intent to conceive was 31% in controls and 36% with CrMS (P = 0.32). By the first cycle, fecundability was 17% in controls, and 4% with CrMS (P = 0.02). No adverse events were reported. We found no significant impact of CrMS on TTP or fecundability, but fewer of the women receiving CrMS conceived by the first cycle.
To evaluate pregnancy probabilities during use of the Creighton Model Fertility Care System (CrMS). Couples who began use of the CrMS were entered into this observational cohort study. Follow-up included detailed reviews of use of the CrMS. Pregnancy probabilities were calculated with both net and gross life-table analysis through 18 months. A natural family planning service delivery program based at an urban hospital in Houston, Tex. A group of 701 couples who received instruction in the CrMS were entered into the study. Most couples (93%) were engaged or married. Most women were white (83%), between the ages of 20 and 34 years (88%), and college graduates (58%). Pregnancies were classified based on a detailed evaluation involving the pregnant woman (usually with her partner). At 12 months, the following net pregnancy probabilities were found per 100 couples: method-related pregnancies, 0.14; pregnancies caused by user and/or teacher error, 2.72; pregnancies caused by achieving-related behavior (genital contact during a time known to be fertile), 12.84; unresolved pregnancies, 1.43; and total pregnancies, 17.12. Pregnancy probabilities were similar when stratified by the following reproductive categories: uncomplicated regular cycles, long cycles, discontinuing oral contraceptives, breastfeeding, and other. Pregnancy probabilities of the CrMS compare favorably with those of other methods of family planning. Most pregnancies result from genital contact during a known fertile time. Women need not have regular cycles to use the CrMS successfully.
Stanford JB, 2004·The Medical and Surgical Practice of NaProTECHNOLOGY
Methodologically rigorous effectiveness data for the CrMS are presented, including method-effectiveness and use-effectiveness rates for pregnancy avoidance drawn from prospective cohort studies, demonstrating rates comparable to or exceeding hormonal contraception. Standardized outcome measurement is necessary to establish the CrMS's scientific credibility and to provide practitioners and patients with accurate, evidence-based counseling on system performance.
Fertility Awareness › Use and Experience › Shared Decision Making · Restorative Reproductive Medicine › NaProTechnology › Program Outcomes
Joseph B Stanford, Christina A Porucznik
Joe Stanford, Joey Stanford, J Stanford, C Porucznik
PMID 28944223 28944223 DOI 10.3389/fmed.2017.00147 10.3389/fmed.2017.00147 Porucznik et al. 2017, Porucznik 2017
Cite this article
Stanford, J. B., & Porucznik, C. A. (2017). Enrollment, Childbearing Motivations, and Intentions of Couples in the Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) Study. Frontiers in medicine, 4, 147. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2017.00147
Stanford JB, Porucznik CA. Enrollment, Childbearing Motivations, and Intentions of Couples in the Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) Study. Front Med (Lausanne). 2017;4:147. doi:10.3389/fmed.2017.00147
Stanford, J. B., and C. A. Porucznik. "Enrollment, Childbearing Motivations, and Intentions of Couples in the Creighton Model Effectiveness, Intentions, and Behaviors Assessment (CEIBA) Study." Frontiers in medicine, vol. 4, 2017, pp. 147.
Keywords
Attitudes, Behavioral Methods, Cervical Mucus Method, Family Planning, Knowledge, Natural Family Planning, Practice, Pregnancy Intentions