Relationship Between the Menstrual Cycle and Timing of Ovulation Revealed by New Protocols: Analysis of Data from a Self-Tracking Health App

Satoshi Sohda, Kenta Suzuki, Ichiro Igari, Satoshi Sohda, Kenta Suzuki, Ichiro Igari

Abstract

Background: There are many mobile phone apps aimed at helping women map their ovulation and menstrual cycles and facilitating successful conception (or avoiding pregnancy). These apps usually ask users to input various biological features and have accumulated the menstrual cycle data of a vast number of women.

Objective: The purpose of our study was to clarify how the data obtained from a self-tracking health app for female mobile phone users can be used to improve the accuracy of prediction of the date of next ovulation.

Methods: Using the data of 7043 women who had reliable menstrual and ovulation records out of 8,000,000 users of a mobile phone app of a health care service, we analyzed the relationship between the menstrual cycle length, follicular phase length, and luteal phase length. Then we fitted a linear function to the relationship between the length of the menstrual cycle and timing of ovulation and compared it with the existing calendar-based methods.

Results: The correlation between the length of the menstrual cycle and the length of the follicular phase was stronger than the correlation between the length of the menstrual cycle and the length of the luteal phase, and there was a positive correlation between the lengths of past and future menstrual cycles. A strong positive correlation was also found between the mean length of past cycles and the length of the follicular phase. The correlation between the mean cycle length and the luteal phase length was also statistically significant. In most of the subjects, our method (ie, the calendar-based method based on the optimized function) outperformed the Ogino method of predicting the next ovulation date. Our method also outperformed the ovulation date prediction method that assumes the middle day of a mean menstrual cycle as the date of the next ovulation.

Conclusions: The large number of subjects allowed us to capture the relationships between the lengths of the menstrual cycle, follicular phase, and luteal phase in more detail than previous studies. We then demonstrated how the present calendar methods could be improved by the better grouping of women. This study suggested that even without integrating various biological metrics, the dataset collected by a self-tracking app can be used to develop formulas that predict the ovulation day when the data are aggregated. Because the method that we developed requires data only on the first day of menstruation, it would be the best option for couples during the early stages of their attempt to have a baby or for those who want to avoid the cost associated with other methods. Moreover, the result will be the baseline for more advanced methods that integrate other biological metrics.

Keywords: calendar calculation; fertility; menstrual cycle; person generated health data; self-tracking.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: KS and II are employees of MTI Ltd. In addition, KS and II have a patent (Japan Patent Office, No. P5998307) pending.

©Satoshi Sohda, Kenta Suzuki, Ichiro Igari. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 27.11.2017.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Accuracy of the Ogino, HCL, and the Optimized methods in predicting the day of the next ovulation date with allowable prediction error=0 (a-d), 1 (e-h), and 2 (i-j) for different mean cycle lengths (solid line, dashed line, and dotted line indicate the Ogino, HCL, and the Optimized methods, respectively).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean accuracy over different mean cycle lengths with allowable prediction error=0 (a), 1 (b), and 2 (c) (solid line, dashed line, and dotted line indicate the Ogino, HCL, and the Optimized methods, respectively).

References

    1. Dunson DB, Colombo B, Baird DD. Changes with age in the level and duration of fertility in the menstrual cycle. Hum Reprod. 2002 May;17(5):1399–1403.
    1. Stanford JB, White GL, Hatasaka H. Timing intercourse to achieve pregnancy: current evidence. Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Dec;100(6):1333–1341.
    1. Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Baird DD. Timing of sexual intercourse in relation to ovulation. Effects on the probability of conception, survival of the pregnancy, and sex of the baby. N Engl J Med. 1995 Dec 07;333(23):1517–1521. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199512073332301.
    1. Mihm M, Gangooly S, Muttukrishna S. The normal menstrual cycle in women. Anim Reprod Sci. 2011 Apr;124(3-4):229–236. doi: 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2010.08.030.
    1. Colombo B, Masarotto G. Daily Fecundability. DemRes. 2000 Sep 06;3:5. doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2000.3.5.
    1. Spieler JM, Collins WP. Potential fertility - defining the window of opportunity. J Intern Med Res. 2001;29(1_suppl):3A–13A. doi: 10.1177/14732300010290S102.
    1. Rapp A, Cena F. Personal informatics for everyday life: How users without prior self-tracking experience engage with personal data. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 2016 Oct;94:1–17. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.05.006.
    1. Epstein DA, Ping A, Fogarty J, Munson SA. A lived informatics model of personal informatics. ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing; 2015; Osaka, Japan. 2015. pp. 731–742.
    1. Li I, Dey A, Forlizzi J. A stage-based model of personal informatics systems. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; 2010; Atlanta, GA. 2010. pp. 557–566.
    1. Simmons RG, Shattuck DC, Jennings VH. Assessing the Efficacy of an App-Based Method of Family Planning: The Dot Study Protocol. JMIR Res Protoc. 2017 Jan 18;6(1):e5. doi: 10.2196/resprot.6886.
    1. Mangone ER, Lebrun V, Muessig KE. Mobile Phone Apps for the Prevention of Unintended Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Content Analysis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016 Jan 19;4(1):e6. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.4846.
    1. Lupton D. Quantified sex: a critical analysis of sexual and reproductive self-tracking using apps. Cult Health Sex. 2015;17(4):440–453. doi: 10.1080/13691058.2014.920528.
    1. Pallone SR, Bergus GR. Fertility awareness-based methods: another option for family planning. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22(2):147–157. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2009.02.080038.
    1. Fehring RJ. New low- and high-tech calendar methods of family planning. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2005;50(1):31–38. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2004.07.001.
    1. Ogino K. Uber den konzeptionstermin des weibes und seine anwendung in der praxis. Zentralbl Gynakol. 1932;56:721–732.
    1. Lamprecht VM, Grummer-Strawn L. Development of new formulas to identify the fertile time of the menstrual cycle. Contraception. 1996 Dec;54(6):339–343.
    1. Arévalo M, Jennings V, Sinai I. Efficacy of a new method of family planning: the Standard Days Method. Contraception. 2002 May;65(5):333–338.
    1. Swan M. Health 2050: The realization of personalized medicine through crowdsourcing, the quantified self, and the participatory biocitizen. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2012;2:93–118. doi: 10.3390/jpm2030093.
    1. Swan M. The quantified self: Fundamental disruption in big data science and biological discovery. Big Data. 2013;1:85–99. doi: 10.1089/big.2012.0002.
    1. Schmidheiny K, Basel U. Short Guides to Microeconometrics. Basel, Switzerland: Unversitat Basel; 2011. Panel data: fixed and random effects; pp. 2–7.
    1. Fehring R, Schneider M, Raviele K. Variability in the phases of the menstrual cycle. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2006;35(3):376–384. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2006.00051.x.
    1. Creinin MD, Keverline S, Meyn LA. How regular is regular? An analysis of menstrual cycle regularity. Contraception. 2004 Oct;70(4):289–292. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2004.04.012.
    1. France JT, Graham FM, Gosling L, Hair P, Knox BS. Characteristics of natural conceptual cycles occurring in a prospective study of sex preselection: fertility awareness symptoms, hormone levels, sperm survival, and pregnancy outcome. International Journal of Fertility. 1991;37:244–255.
    1. World Health Organization A prospective multicentre study of the ovulation method of natural family planning. IV. The outcome of pregnancy. World Health Organization. Fertil Steril. 1984 Apr;41(4):593–598.
    1. Fiordelli M, Diviani N, Schulz PJ. Mapping mHealth research: a decade of evolution. J Med Internet Res. 2013 May 21;15(5):e95. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2430.
    1. Free C, Phillips G, Galli L, Watson L, Felix L, Edwards P, Patel V, Haines A. The effectiveness of mobile-health technology-based health behaviour change or disease management interventions for health care consumers: a systematic review. PLoS Med. 2013;10(1):e1001362. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001362.
    1. Klasnja P, Pratt W. Healthcare in the pocket: mapping the space of mobile-phone health interventions. J Biomed Inform. 2012 Feb;45(1):184–198. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2011.08.017.
    1. Boulos MN, Wheeler S, Tavares C, Jones R. How smartphones are changing the face of mobile and participatory healthcare: an overview, with example from eCAALYX. Biomed Eng Online. 2011 Apr 05;10:24. doi: 10.1186/1475-925X-10-24.
    1. Pew Research Center Device ownership over time. [2017-02-03].
    1. Economic Research Office, General Policy Division, Information and Communications Policy Bureau . White Paper. Information and Communications in Japan. Tokyo: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan; 2015.
    1. Hsu J, Liu D, Yu Y, Zhao HT, Chen ZR, Li J, Chen W. The Top Chinese Mobile Health Apps: A Systematic Investigation. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Aug 29;18(8):e222. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5955.
    1. Swan M. Emerging patient-driven health care models: an examination of health social networks, consumer personalized medicine and quantified self-tracking. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2009 Dec;6(2):492–525. doi: 10.3390/ijerph6020492.
    1. Fox S, Duggan M. Mobile health 2012. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2012.
    1. IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics. [2017-02-03]. Availability and profile of consumer mHealth apps .
    1. Lupton D. M-health and health promotion: The digital cyborg and surveillance society. Soc Theory Health. 2012 Jun 27;10(3):229–244. doi: 10.1057/sth.2012.6.
    1. Sharon T. Self-Tracking for Health and the Quantified Self: Re-Articulating Autonomy, Solidarity, and Authenticity in an Age of Personalized Healthcare. Philos Technol. 2016 Apr 18;30(1):93–121. doi: 10.1007/s13347-016-0215-5.
    1. Schüll ND. Data for life: Wearable technology and the design of self-care. BioSocieties. 2016 Oct 13;11(3):317–333. doi: 10.1057/biosoc.2015.47.
    1. Bentley F, Tollmar K, Stephenson P, Levy L, Jones B, Robertson S, Price E, Catrambone R, Wilson J. Health Mashups. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact. 2013 Nov 01;20(5):1–27. doi: 10.1145/2503823.
    1. Rapp A, Tirassa M. Know Thyself: A Theory of the Self for Personal Informatics. Human–Computer Interaction. 2017 Jan 27;32(5-6):335–380. doi: 10.1080/07370024.2017.1285704.
    1. Pickard K, Swan M. Big desire to share big health data: A shift in consumer attitudes toward personal health information. AAAI Spring Symposium; 2014; Palo Alto, CA. 2014. pp. 51–58.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅