Fertility Awareness Technology

Use of menstruation and fertility app trackers: a scoping review of the evidence

Earle S, Marston HR, Hadley R, Banks D

Published April 2021 BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health, 47(2), 90-101
DOI 10.1136/bmjsrh-2019-200488 PMID 32253280

RRM Academy Synopsis

Research on fertility and period apps is sparse, a review finds

A scoping review of research on period and fertility tracking apps found little evidence-based research and little critical debate about how the apps are built and regulated, according to its authors. The review covered 18 records from 13 countries. Women want apps they can trust to be accurate and backed by evidence, whatever their reason for tracking.

Key Findings

  • Reviewers screened 654 records. After 135 duplicates and 501 ineligible records were removed, 18 records from 13 countries remained.
  • The records grouped into three themes: tracking for fertility and reproductive health, planning a pregnancy, and preventing one.
  • Why women use fertility apps differs between users, shows overlap, and changes over time.
  • Across all three uses, women wanted apps that are accurate and grounded in evidence, including when the app served as contraception.
  • The authors found little critical discussion of how apps are developed, evaluated, used, and regulated, and describe fertility health professionals and users as absent from the studies.

Interpretation

The published abstract is the only source for this entry; the full text was unavailable. The paper is a scoping review, a survey of what research exists on a topic. The reviewers mapped literature from 2010 to April 2019 and found a small body of work.

RRM Context

Cycle charting is a core skill in restorative reproductive medicine, and many people now start with an app. The review shows how thin the research base for those apps was through April 2019. Evidence-based tracking is a fair standard for any tool that claims to identify fertile days or guide pregnancy planning.

Abstract

Introduction

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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.

Topics

Related research

Fertility Awareness › Technology › Cycle Tracking Apps
Sarah Earle, Hannah R Marston, Robin Hadley, Duncan Banks
S Earle, H Marston, R Hadley, D Banks
PMID 32253280 32253280 DOI 10.1136/bmjsrh-2019-200488 10.1136/bmjsrh-2019-200488 Earle et al. 2021, Earle 2021