Fertility Awareness Technology

Plausibility of Menstrual Cycle Apps Claiming to Support Conception

Freis A, Freundl-Schütt T, Wallwiener LM, Baur S, Strowitzki T, Freundl G, Frank-Herrmann P

Frontiers in public health, 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00098 PMID 29666788 PMC PMC5891577

RRM Academy Synopsis

Symptothermal cycle apps rated most plausible for fertile days

In a 2018 German scoring study of 12 cycle apps, the four symptothermal apps rated most plausible for finding fertile days. They scored 11 to 20 out of 30 points. The six calendar-based apps scored zero, and the two calculothermal apps scored 3 and 2.

Key Findings

  • The six calendar-based apps estimate fertile days from earlier cycles. Each earned zero points, because none met any of the eight scoring criteria.
  • Of the calculothermal apps, Ovy earned 3/30 points and Natural Cycles earned 2/30 points. Neither used any data from the current cycle.
  • Lady Cycle and myNFP each earned 20/30 points, Lily earned 19/30 and OvuView earned 11/30. No app earned the maximum score.
  • In the pilot test scenarios, calendar-based apps gave a wrong ovulation day when a cycle ran longer or shorter than the length the app expected.
  • Lady Cycle and myNFP basically performed their analyses correctly according to the reference method. The authors judged three of the tested apps eligible for further study.

Interpretation

The authors built an eight-criteria scoring system and tested 12 apps offered in German and English. They fed calendar-based apps series of cycles with varying lengths. They fed symptom-based apps cycles with a known temperature rise, mucus pattern and clinical ovulation. The scores rate the plausibility of each app's method and the evidence behind it. The authors state that the rating makes no statement on effectiveness and that no app has yet been studied in a prospective pregnancy study.

RRM Context

Lady Cycle and myNFP use the Sensiplan method. A prospective time-to-pregnancy study cited in the paper followed 340 healthy women trying for pregnancy with Sensiplan from their first cycle. The pregnancy rate reached 38, 68, 81, and 92% by cycles 1, 3, 6, and 12. Restorative reproductive medicine builds on cycle charting. The symptothermal apps follow that same logic.

Abstract

The interval of peak fertility during the menstrual cycle is of limited duration, and the day of ovulation varies, even in women with fairly regular cycles. Therefore, menstrual cycle apps identifying the "fertile window" for women trying to conceive must be quite precise. A deviation of a few days may lead the couple to focus on less- or non-fertile days for sexual intercourse and thus may be worse than random intercourse. The aim of the present investigation was to develop a scoring system for rating available apps for determining the fertile window and secondarily pilot test 12 apps currently available in both German and English (consisting of 6 calendar-based apps: Clue Menstruations- und Zykluskalender, Flo Menstruationskalender, Maya-Mein Periodentracker, Menstruationskalender Pro, Period Tracker Deluxe, and WomanLog-Pro-Kalender; 2 calculothermal apps: Ovy and Natural Cycles; and 4 symptothermal apps: myNFP, Lady Cycle, Lily, and OvuView). The calendar-based apps were investigated by entering several series of cycles with varying lengths, whereas the symptom-based apps were examined by entering data of cycles with known temperature rise, cervical mucus pattern, and clinical ovulation. The main criteria for evaluating the cycle apps were as follows: (1) What methods/parameters were used to determine the fertile window? (2) What study results exist concerning that underlying method/parameters? (3) What study results exist concerning the app itself? (4) Was there a qualified counseling service? The calendar-based apps predicted the fertile days based on data of previous cycles. They obtained zero points in our scoring system, as they did not comply with any of the evaluated criteria. Calculothermal apps had similar deficits for predicting the most fertile days and produced suboptimal results (Ovy 3/30 points and Natural Cycles 2/30 points). The symptothermal apps determined the fertile days based on parameters of the current cycle: Lady Cycle scored 20/30 points, myNFP 20/30 points, Lily 19/30 points, and OvuView 11/30 points. We concluded that the available cycle apps vary according to their underlying scientific quality and clear rating criteria have been suggested. Three of the tested apps were judged to be eligible for further study. The scientific evaluation of cycle apps depends on good prospective studies undertaken by independent investigators who are free of commercial bias.

Topics

By this author

Related research

Fertility Awareness › Technology › Cycle Tracking Apps · Research Methods › Evidence Synthesis › Systematic Reviews · Menstrual Cycle › Cycle Biomarkers › Basal Body Temperature
Alexander Freis, Tanja Freundl-Schütt, Lisa-Maria Wallwiener, Sigfried Baur, Thomas Strowitzki, Günter Freundl, Petra Frank-Herrmann
Alex Freis, A Freis, T Freundl-Schütt, L Wallwiener, S Baur, Tom Strowitzki, T Strowitzki, G Freundl, P Frank-Herrmann
PMID 29666788 29666788 DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00098 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00098 Freis et al. 2018, Freis 2018