Fertility Awareness Effectiveness

Evaluating Pregnancy Rates in Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Family Planning: Simulated Comparison of Correct Use to Avoid, Method-Related, and Total Pregnancy Rates

Stanford JB, Duane M, Simmons R

Published August 6, 2024 The Linacre Quarterly, 91(3), 315-328
DOI 10.1177/00243639231212440 PMID 39104463 PMC PMC11298100

RRM Academy Synopsis

In simulations, FABM method-related pregnancy rates fall artificially

In simulations, the method-related pregnancy rate drops artificially as intermediate use rises. The correct use rate does not. It stayed the same at every level of use.

Key Findings

  • With a per-cycle pregnancy chance of 0.001 in correct use to avoid, the method-related rate fell from 1.2 percent to 0.1 percent as intermediate use rose from 5 to 95 percent.
  • Across that same range, the correct use pregnancy rate stayed at 1.3 percent.
  • With a per-cycle chance of 0.002, the method-related rate fell from 2.4 percent to 0.1 percent, and the correct use rate stayed at 2.6 percent.
  • Adding cycles of targeted use to conceive also lowered the method-related pregnancy rate while the total pregnancy rate rose.
  • The authors write that the apparent drop can be substantial, down to half of the correct use rate or lower.

Interpretation

This study used a life table simulation. The authors took per-cycle pregnancy chances from earlier studies and modeled every cycle with intercourse, steady mixes of use, and a small dropout chance. They call the lower method-related rate artificial because the correct use chance stayed constant. A second set of assumptions, with no couples changing their type of use, gave very similar correct use results. The findings support further study of how fertility awareness-based method research calculates and reports pregnancy rates.

RRM Context

The authors cite a review of FABM studies. Only eight of fifty-three reported an appropriately calculated correct use pregnancy rate. Restorative reproductive medicine builds on charted cycle signs. How a study counts correct use shapes how well a charting method appears to work.

Abstract

Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs), also known as natural family planning (NFP), enable couples to identify the days of the menstrual cycle when intercourse may result in pregnancy ("fertile days"), and to avoid intercourse on fertile days if they wish to avoid pregnancy. Thus, these methods are fully dependent on user behavior for effectiveness to avoid pregnancy. For couples and clinicians considering the use of an FABM, one important metric to consider is the highest expected effectiveness (lowest possible pregnancy rate) during the correct use of the method to avoid pregnancy. To assess this, most studies of FABMs have reported a method-related pregnancy rate (a cumulative proportion), which is calculated based on all cycles (or months) in the study. In contrast, the correct use to avoid pregnancy rate (also a cumulative proportion) has the denominator of cycles with the correct use of the FABM to avoid pregnancy. The relationship between these measures has not been evaluated quantitatively. We conducted a series of simulations demonstrating that the method-related pregnancy rate is artificially decreased in direct proportion to the proportion of cycles with intermediate use (any use other than correct use to avoid or targeted use to conceive), which also increases the total pregnancy rate. Thus, as the total pregnancy rate rises (related to intermediate use), the method-related pregnancy rate falls artificially while the correct use pregnancy rate remains constant. For practical application, we propose the core elements needed to assess correct use cycles in FABM studies.

Summary

Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) can be used by couples to avoid pregnancy, by avoiding intercourse on fertile days. Users want to know what the highest effectiveness (lowest pregnancy rate) would be if they use an FABM correctly and consistently to avoid pregnancy. In this simulation study, we compare two different measures: (1) the method-related pregnancy rate; and (2) the correct use pregnancy rate. We show that the method-related pregnancy rate is biased too low if some users in the study are not using the method consistently to avoid pregnancy, while the correct use pregnancy rate obtains an accurate estimate.

Short Summary

In FABM studies, the method-related pregnancy rate is biased too low, but the correct use pregnancy rate is unbiased.

Read the guide

Topics

By this author

Related research

Fertility Awareness › Effectiveness › Typical and Perfect Use · Research Methods › Measurement and Statistics › Outcome Definitions
Joseph B Stanford, Marguerite Duane, Rebecca Simmons
Joe Stanford, Joey Stanford, J Stanford, M Duane, Becky Simmons, R Simmons
PMID 39104463 39104463 DOI 10.1177/00243639231212440 10.1177/00243639231212440 Stanford et al. 2024, Stanford 2024