Dataset Information

Real-life insights on menstrual cycles and ovulation using big data.

ABSTRACT:

Study question

What variations underlie the menstrual cycle length and ovulation day of women trying to conceive?

Summary answer

Big data from a connected ovulation test revealed the extent of variation in menstrual cycle length and ovulation day in women trying to conceive.

What is known already

Timing intercourse to coincide with the fertile period of a woman maximises the chances of conception. The day of ovulation varies on an inter- and intra-individual level.

Study design size duration

A total of 32?595 women who had purchased a connected ovulation test system contributed 75?981 cycles for analysis. Day of ovulation was determined from the fertility test results. The connected home ovulation test system enables users to identify their fertile phase. The app benefits users by enabling them to understand their personal fertility information. During each menstrual cycle, users input their perceived cycle length into an accessory application, and data on hormone levels from the tests are uploaded to the application and stored in an anonymised cloud database. This study compared users' perceived cycle characteristics with actual cycle characteristics. The perceived and actual cycle length information was analysed to provide population ranges.

Participants/materials setting methods

This study analysed data from the at-home use of a commercially available connected home ovulation test by women across the USA and UK.

Main results and the role of chance

Overall, 25.3% of users selected a 28-day cycle as their perceived cycle length; however, only 12.4% of users actually had a 28-day cycle. Most women (87%) had actual menstrual cycle lengths between 23 and 35 days, with a normal distribution centred on day 28, and over half of the users (52%) had cycles that varied by 5 days or more. There was a 10-day spread of observed ovulation days for a 28-day cycle, with the most common day of ovulation being Day 15. Similar variation was observed for all cycle lengths examined. For users who conducted a test on every day requested by the app, a luteinising hormone (LH) surge was detected in 97.9% of cycles.

Limitations reasons for caution

Data were from a self-selected population of women who were prepared to purchase a commercially available product to aid conception and so may not fully represent the wider population. No corresponding demographic data were collected with the cycle information.

Wider implications of the findings

Using big data has provided more personalised insights into women's fertility; this could enable women trying to conceive to better time intercourse, increasing the likelihood of conception.

Study funding/competing interests

The study was funded by SPD Development Company Ltd (Bedford, UK), a fully owned subsidiary of SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics GmbH (Geneva, Switzerland). I.S., B.G. and S.J. are employees of the SPD Development Company Ltd.

SUBMITTER: Soumpasis I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7164578 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Real-life insights on menstrual cycles and ovulation using big data.

Soumpasis I I Grace B B Johnson S S

Human reproduction open 20200416 2

<h4>Study question</h4>What variations underlie the menstrual cycle length and ovulation day of women trying to conceive?<h4>Summary answer</h4>Big data from a connected ovulation test revealed the extent of variation in menstrual cycle length and ovulation day in women trying to conceive.<h4>What is known already</h4>Timing intercourse to coincide with the fertile period of a woman maximises the chances of conception. The day of ovulation varies on an inter- and intra-individual level.<h4>Study ...[more]

PMID: 32328534

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is still undergoing complicated developments in Vietnam and around the world. There is a lot of information about the COVID-19 pandemic, especially on the internet where people can create and share information quickly. This can lead to an infodemic, which is a challenge every government might face in the fight against pandemics.ObjectiveThis study aims to understand public attention toward the pandemic (from December 2019 to November 2020) through 7 types of sources: Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, blogs, news sites, forums, and e-commerce sites.MethodsWe collected and analyzed nearly 38 million pieces of text data from the aforementioned sources via SocialHeat, a social listening (infoveillance) platform developed by YouNet Group. We described not only public attention volume trends, discussion sentiments, top sources, top posts that gained the most public attention, and hot keyword frequency but also hot keywords' co-occurrence as visualized by the VOSviewer software tool.ResultsIn this study, we reached four main conclusions. First, based on changing discussion trends regarding the COVID-19 subject, 7 periods were identified based on events that can be aggregated into two pandemic waves in Vietnam. Second, community pages on Facebook were the source of the most engagement from the public. However, the sources with the highest average interaction efficiency per article were government sources. Third, people's attitudes when discussing the pandemic have changed from negative to positive emotions. Fourth, the type of content that attracts the most interactions from people varies from time to time. Besides that, the issue-attention cycle theory occurred not only once but four times during the COVID-19 pandemic in Vietnam.ConclusionsOur study shows that online resources can help the government quickly identify public attention to public health messages during times of crisis. We also determined the hot spots that most interested the public and public attention communication patterns, which can help the government get practical information to make more effective policy reactions to help prevent the spread of the pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundAs war and famine are population level stressors that have been historically linked to menstrual cycle abnormalities, we hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic could similarly affect ovulation and menstruation among women.MethodologyWe conducted a retrospective cohort study examining changes in ovulation and menstruation among women using the Natural Cycles mobile tracking app. We compared de-identified cycle data from March-September 2019 (pre-pandemic) versus March-September 2020 (during pandemic) to determine differences in the proportion of users experiencing anovulation, abnormal cycle length, and prolonged menses, as well as population level changes in these parameters, while controlling for user-reported stress during the pandemic.FindingsWe analyzed data from 214,426 cycles from 18,076 app users, primarily from Great Britain (29.3%) and the United States (22.6%). The average user was 33 years of age; most held at least a university degree (79.9%). Nearly half (45.4%) reported more pandemic-related stress. Changes in average cycle and menstruation lengths were not clinically significant, remaining at 29 and 4 days, respectively. Approximately 7.7% and 19.5% of users recorded more anovulatory cycles and abnormal cycle lengths during the pandemic, respectively. Contrary to expectation, 9.6% and 19.6% recorded fewer anovulatory cycles and abnormal cycle lengths, respectively. Women self-reporting more (32.0%) and markedly more (13.6%) stress during the pandemic were not more likely to experience cycle abnormalities.ConclusionsThe COVD-19 pandemic did not induce population-level changes to ovulation and menstruation among women using a mobile app to track menstrual cycles and predict ovulation. While some women experienced abnormalities during the pandemic, this proportion was smaller than that observed prior to the pandemic. As most app users in this study were well-educated women over the age of 30 years, and from high-income countries, their experience of the COVID-19 pandemic might differ in ways that limit the generalizability of these findings.

Project description:BackgroundTraditionally, dengue surveillance is based on case reporting to a central health agency. However, the delay between a case and its notification can limit the system responsiveness. Machine learning methods have been developed to reduce the reporting delays and to predict outbreaks, based on non-traditional and non-clinical data sources. The aim of this systematic review was to identify studies that used real-world data, Big Data and/or machine learning methods to monitor and predict dengue-related outcomes.Methodology/principal findingsWe performed a search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature between January 1, 2000 and August 31, 2020. The review (ID: CRD42020172472) focused on data-driven studies. Reviews, randomized control trials and descriptive studies were not included. Among the 119 studies included, 67% were published between 2016 and 2020, and 39% used at least one novel data stream. The aim of the included studies was to predict a dengue-related outcome (55%), assess the validity of data sources for dengue surveillance (23%), or both (22%). Most studies (60%) used a machine learning approach. Studies on dengue prediction compared different prediction models, or identified significant predictors among several covariates in a model. The most significant predictors were rainfall (43%), temperature (41%), and humidity (25%). The two models with the highest performances were Neural Networks and Decision Trees (52%), followed by Support Vector Machine (17%). We cannot rule out a selection bias in our study because of our two main limitations: we did not include preprints and could not obtain the opinion of other international experts.Conclusions/significanceCombining real-world data and Big Data with machine learning methods is a promising approach to improve dengue prediction and monitoring. Future studies should focus on how to better integrate all available data sources and methods to improve the response and dengue management by stakeholders.

Project description:ObjectivesWe determined if the time interval between two ovulation induction intrauterine artificial insemination (IUI) treatment cycles should be extended by one or more natural menstrual cycles in patients undergoing successive cycles of ovulation stimulation, and whether this affects clinical pregnancy rate (CPR).DesignThis study was conducted on infertility patients treated under the ovulation induction programme IUI in a large reproductive centre in China. Study participants were assigned into continuous and discontinuous groups. Differences in baseline clinical pregnancy and abortion rates were compared between the groups. A multivariate logistic model was used to evaluate the effects of time interval on clinical pregnancy outcomes.SettingReproductive Centre of Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Lianyungang city.InterventionsNone.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was CPR, the secondary outcome measure was the abortion rate.ResultsA total of 550 IUI treatment cycles involving 275 couples were included in this study. Differences in CPR and abortion rate between the groups were not significant (20.5% vs 21.9% and 27.8% vs 22.0%, p≥0.05). Stratified analyses based on infertility factors did not reveal any significant differences in pregnancy and abortion rates between the groups (p≥0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that increased endometrial thickness correlates with CPR (OR 1.205, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.384, p=0.008). Compared with primary infertility, secondary infertility significantly correlated with improved CPR (OR 2.637, 95% CI 1.313 to 5.298, p=0.006). The effects of time interval between the first two ovulation induction IUI treatment cycles on clinical pregnancy were not significant (OR 1.007, 95% CI 0.513 to 1.974, p=0.985).ConclusionsLonger time intervals between the first two ovulation induction IUI treatment cycles did not significantly improve CPR. Therefore, in the absence of clear clinical indications, it may not be necessary to deliberately prolong the interval between two ovulation induction IUI treatment cycles.

Dataset Information

Real-life insights on menstrual cycles and ovulation using big data.

Study question

Summary answer

What is known already

Study design size duration

Participants/materials setting methods

Main results and the role of chance

Limitations reasons for caution

Wider implications of the findings

Study funding/competing interests

Publications

Real-life insights on menstrual cycles and ovulation using big data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets