Duane, M., Contreras, A., Jensen, E. T., & White, A. (2016). The Performance of Fertility Awareness-based Method Apps Marketed to Avoid Pregnancy. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, 29(4), 508-511. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.160022
Duane M, Contreras A, Jensen ET, White A. The Performance of Fertility Awareness-based Method Apps Marketed to Avoid Pregnancy. J Am Board Fam Med. 2016;29(4):508-511. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.160022
Duane, M., et al. "The Performance of Fertility Awareness-based Method Apps Marketed to Avoid Pregnancy." Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, vol. 29, no. 4, 2016, pp. 508-511.
Most Fertility Apps Carry Disclaimers or Lack Evidence-Based Methods
Of 95 fertility apps, 55 forbade use to prevent pregnancy or did not claim an evidence-based FABM. A 2016 brief report scored the rest on real cycle data. Only 6 of 40 reviewed apps had perfect accuracy or no false negatives.
Key Findings
Searches of iTunes, Google, and Google Play identified 95 apps. The authors excluded 55 that carried a disclaimer prohibiting use for avoiding pregnancy or did not claim an evidence-based FABM.
Of the apps reviewed, 30 predicted days of fertility for the user and 10 did not.
Only 6 apps earned a perfect accuracy score, meaning app-defined fertile days matched evidence-based fertile days, or had no false negatives, meaning no fertile days labeled infertile.
At least 1 app reached a perfect accuracy score in every FABM category except symptohormonal methods.
Several popular apps use proprietary algorithms that peer-reviewed literature has not evaluated, which makes them hard to assess.
Interpretation
The report is a brief study from a family medicine journal. The authors built a rating tool and scored each app against 7 cycles of daily fertility observations derived from real cycle data. The report presents no pregnancy outcomes. Some scoring, such as ease of use, involved reviewer subjectivity, which is why the authors ranked apps on accuracy and authority. The findings cover apps available in 2016. The authors conclude that an app alone, used without training in the method, may fall short of preventing pregnancy.
RRM Context
The authors cite level 1 studies of FABMs used correctly, with effectiveness similar to common hormonal birth control. Restorative reproductive medicine builds on cycle charting. The method-level evidence belongs to named methods such as Creighton, symptothermal, and two-day. The rating tool used those methods as its standards.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Abstract
Introduction
In recent years there has been an explosion in the development of medical apps, with more than 40,000 apps now available. Nearly 100 apps allow women to track their fertility and menstrual cycles and can be used to avoid or achieve pregnancy. Apps offer a convenient way to track fertility biomarkers. However, only some use evidence-based fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs), which with ideal use have rates of effectiveness similar to those of commonly used forms of hormonal birth control. Since having a baby or preventing a pregnancy are important responsibilities, it is critical that women and couples have access to reliable, evidence-based apps that allow them to accurately track their fertility.
Methods
We developed a tool to evaluate and rate fertility apps. This tool is specifically designed to help couples avoid pregnancy.
Results
Results showed that the majority of fertility apps are not based on evidence-based FABMs or include a disclaimer discouraging use for avoiding pregnancy. However, at least 1 app in each FABM category (except symptohormonal methods) had a perfect score on accuracy.
Conclusion
Relying solely on an app to use an FABM, without appropriate training in the method, may not be sufficient to prevent pregnancy.
Duane M et al., 2025·J Restorative Reprod Med·Free to read
To assess the effectiveness of an elective to improve students’ knowledge of fertility awareness-based methods for family planning and to determine whether there was a difference in knowledge gained by student type and/or course structure.
A quasi-experimental study of preand postassessment scores among three different groups of healthcare students. In one group, 24 undergraduate nursing students in a semester-long hybrid course. In a second group, 16 second year medical students in a six-week hybrid selective course. In the third group, 80 fourth year medical students in a two-week online elective for a total of 120 students completing the elective from January 2018 to June 2020. All students completed a knowledge assessment before the course, and the identical assessment after the course, with a maximum possible score of 20. ANOVA and non-parametric tests were used for data analysis.
The main outcome measure was comparison of post-course scores to pre-course scores. The mean pre-course score of about 50% in the undergraduate nursing group (x) was lower than the medical students in the six-week course (y) and two-week course (z) both about 70%. However, there was no difference in the mean post-course scores between the groups, which was about 90%. Assessments were mandated, but lectures were not, which could skew assessment scores. Additionally, the study focused on students signing up for the elective so it may not be generalizable to all medical and nursing student populations. Finally, educational interests and demographics impacting a student’s ability to learn and retain FABM knowledge is beyond the scope of this study. This elective was effective in improving fertility awareness-based method knowledge of medical and nursing students. All student groups had strong post-course knowledge scores – 90% accuracy, regardless of course structure. A fully online elective has the potential to make this knowledge easily available worldwide.
Stanford JB et al., 2024·Linacre Q·Free full text on PubMed Central
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.
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 In FABM studies, the method-related pregnancy rate is biased too low, but the correct use pregnancy rate is unbiased.
Duane M et al., 2024·Fam Med·Free full text on PubMed Central
Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) are evidence-based means of tracking observable biomarkers of a woman's fertility for the purpose of reproductive health monitoring and family planning. However, medical education regarding FABMs is limited. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of a 4-week, two-part online elective on students' knowledge of FABMs, confidence in explaining and offering them to patients, and anticipated behaviors in future practice. The online elective, "FABMs for Family Planning and Women's Health," was delivered from August 2020 to May 2023. Students completed preand postknowledge surveys. Paired t tests and the Wilcoxon signed rank test were used for analysis of the data. A total of 571 students completed the elective, and 462 students completed both preand posttest surveys (response rate=81%). Students' knowledge of FABMs increased significantly. Posttest scores increased by a mean of 9.02 for Part A and 5.95 for Part B. We identified a significant increase in students' confidence discussing FABMs to avoid pregnancy, achieve pregnancy, monitor reproductive health, and address reproductive health concerns. At the completion of the elective, students were significantly more likely to offer FABMs as an option for most or all women. This online elective addresses the knowledge gap in FABMs and was effective in improving students' knowledge of FABMs and their confidence and willingness to offer these methods to patients for family planning and management of common women's health conditions.
Duane M et al., 2022·Front Med (Lausanne)·Free full text on PubMed Central
Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) educate about reproductive health and enable tracking and interpretation of physical signs, such as cervical fluid secretions and basal body temperature, which reflect the hormonal changes women experience on a cyclical basis during the years of ovarian activity. Some methods measure relevant hormone levels directly. Most FABMs allow women to identify ovulation and track this "vital sign" of the menstrual or female reproductive cycle, through daily observations recorded on cycle charts (paper or electronic). Physicians can use the information from FABM charts to guide the diagnosis and management of medical conditions and to support or restore healthy function of the reproductive and endocrine systems, using a restorative reproductive medical (RRM) approach. FABMs can also be used by couples to achieve or avoid pregnancy and may be most effective when taught by a trained instructor. Information about individual FABMs is rarely provided in medical education. Outdated information is widespread both in training programs and in the public sphere. Obtaining accurate information about FABMs is further complicated by the numerous period tracking or fertility apps available, because very few of these apps have evidence to support their effectiveness for identifying the fertile window, for achieving or preventing pregnancy. This article provides an overview of different types of FABMs with a published evidence base, apps and resources for learning and using FABMs, the role FABMs can play in medical evaluation and management, and the effectiveness of FABMs for family planning, both to achieve or to avoid pregnancy.
Ali R et al., 2020·Reprod Biomed Online·Free to read
To characterize mobile fertility tracking applications (apps) to determine the use of such apps for women trying to conceive by identifying the fertile window.
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.
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. 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.
There has been a phenomenal worldwide increase in the development and use of mobile health applications (mHealth apps) that monitor menstruation and fertility. Critics argue that many of the apps are inaccurate and lack evidence from either clinical trials or user experience. The aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the research literature on mHealth apps that track menstruation and fertility. This project followed the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. The ACM, CINAHL, Google Scholar, PubMed and Scopus databases were searched for material published between 1 January 2010 and 30 April 2019. Data summary and synthesis were used to chart and analyse the data. In total 654 records were reviewed. Subsequently, 135 duplicate records and 501 records that did not meet the inclusion criteria were removed. Eighteen records from 13 countries form the basis of this review. The papers reviewed cover a variety of disciplinary and methodological frameworks. Three main themes were identified: fertility and reproductive health tracking, pregnancy planning, and pregnancy prevention. Motivations for fertility app use are varied, overlap and change over time, although women want apps that are accurate and evidence-based regardless of whether they are tracking their fertility, planning a pregnancy or using the app as a form of contraception. There is a lack of critical debate and engagement in the development, evaluation, usage and regulation of fertility and menstruation apps. The paucity of evidence-based research and absence of fertility, health professionals and users in studies is raised.
The advent of new technological approaches to family planning has the potential to address unmet need in low- and middle-income countries. Provision of fertility awareness-based apps have the ability to provide accessible, direct-to-user fertility information to help women achieve their reproductive goals. The CycleBeads app, a digital platform for the Standard Days Method (SDM), a modern method of family planning, helps women achieve or prevent pregnancy, or track their cycles using the only their period start dates.
Brief social marketing campaigns were launched by the app developer to monitor cost and distribution of the CycleBeads app, understand the user profile, and assess user experience. Monitoring and evaluation through in-app micro surveys occurred over a 6-cycle period in seven countries: Egypt, Ghana, India, Jordan, Kenya, Nigeria, and Rwanda. In-app micro-surveys were utilized to collect data around demographics, mode of use of the app, prior experiences with family planning, and satisfaction to better understand women's interactions with the apps, and the possibility for meeting unmet need. Analyzes focused on women who were using the app to prevent pregnancy or track their cycles.
Social media campaigns proved to be an easy, low-cost approach to advertising the CycleBeads app. As a result, 356,520 women downloaded the app, and the cost to the advertiser per download ranged from $0.17-0.69. A majority of app users were between 20-29 years old, married or in exclusive relationships. Overall, 39.9% of users were using the app to prevent pregnancy, 38.5% to plan a pregnancy, and 21.6% were tracking their cycles. Among the users preventing pregnancy, 64.1% of women had not used a family planning method 3 months before downloading the CycleBeads app. One-third of users who were using the app to track their cycles, reported that they had not been using any form of family planning. In all seven countries, nearly 60% of women reported that they would definitely recommend the CycleBeads app to a friend, indicating their satisfaction with the app.
Our main findings indicate that a social media campaign is a low-cost approach to making the CycleBeads app accessible to women. The app addresses multiple reproductive intentions and attracts a diverse demographic of users across different life stages. For many women the app was the first modern method they used in the last 3 months, showing that fertility awareness-based apps have the potential to address an unmet need. Future studies should focus on changes in behavior during the fertile window, partner communication, and future family planning intentions.
Alison Contreras, Elizabeth T Jensen, Amina White, Marguerite Duane
A Contreras, Liz Jensen, Beth Jensen, Betsy Jensen, E Jensen, A White, M Duane
PMID 27390383 27390383 DOI 10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.160022 10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.160022 Duane et al. 2016, Duane 2016
Cite this article
Duane, M., Contreras, A., Jensen, E. T., & White, A. (2016). The Performance of Fertility Awareness-based Method Apps Marketed to Avoid Pregnancy. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, 29(4), 508-511. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.160022
Duane M, Contreras A, Jensen ET, White A. The Performance of Fertility Awareness-based Method Apps Marketed to Avoid Pregnancy. J Am Board Fam Med. 2016;29(4):508-511. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2016.04.160022
Duane, M., et al. "The Performance of Fertility Awareness-based Method Apps Marketed to Avoid Pregnancy." Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, vol. 29, no. 4, 2016, pp. 508-511.