Billings, J. J. (1972). Ovulation method of family planning. Lancet (London, England), 2(7788), 1193-1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(72)92610-4
Billings JJ. Ovulation method of family planning. Lancet. 1972;2(7788):1193-1194. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(72)92610-4
Billings, J. J. "Ovulation method of family planning." Lancet (London, England), vol. 2, no. 7788, 1972, pp. 1193-1194.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Author affiliations
1 institution
St Vincent's HospitalMelbourne
RRM Academy Synopsis
The ovulation method had a 0.69% combined failure rate in Tonga
A 1972 Lancet letter reports that the ovulation method had a combined failure rate of 0.69% in Tonga. The author answers correspondents who questioned the Tonga report, argues that true effectiveness should be judged by factors beyond the couple's control, and describes how the women learned the method.
Study at a glance, letter to the editor: Ovulation method combined failure rate was 0.69% in Tonga. Source: Billings JJ, 1972, PMID 4117608.
Key Findings
The author gives 0.69% as the combined failure rate of the ovulation method in Tonga, counting both biological failures and failures by the users themselves.
After weekly supervision during teaching, the Tongan women were seen only on request, months later when a visit to their island was possible. The author states that women can teach each other.
Women who wanted the method could take it up, time on the method was counted from instruction, and women with irregular cycles or who were breast-feeding could enter.
The author argues that a method's true effectiveness should be assessed by factors beyond the couple's control that prevent successful use, such as intolerable ill-effects or an inability to understand the method.
In an early study cited in the letter, the temperature method showed a basal body temperature rise many days ahead of ovulation, and one woman produced no intelligible temperature record.
Interpretation
The paper is a letter to the editor of The Lancet, written in reply to correspondence about a published report from Tonga. It restates one outcome figure from that report, the combined failure rate. The rest sets out the author's argument on how to assess a family-planning method. The author notes that more documented evidence on the comparison with the temperature method will follow.
RRM Context
The ovulation method is a fertility awareness-based method. Women learn to read their own fertile and infertile signs, which builds body literacy and supports care guided by cycle charting. The letter's stress on choices that belong to the husband and wife suits the couple-centered approach of restorative reproductive medicine.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
