ArticlePloS one2025
Pregnancies, intentions, and fertility behaviors during use of the Creighton Model FertilityCare System after initial intention to avoid pregnancy: Results from the Creighton Model effectiveness, intentions, behaviors assessment study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKnowledge of the fertile and infertile phases of the menstrual cycle can be applied to conceive or to avoid pregnancy. Fertility intentions and sexual behaviors during the fertile time may influence whether and when pregnancy occurs. The Creighton Model FertilityCare System (CrMS) is a specific system of fertility appreciation used to conceive or to avoid pregnancy. The objective of this paper is to report intentions, behaviors, and pregnancy rates during use of the CrMS among couples who initially intended to avoid pregnancy. DATA AND
methodsWe analyzed a prospective cohort study conducted in 17 CrMS centers across the USA and Canada, following 296 couples for up to one year after onset of initial use of the CrMS to avoid pregnancy. Baseline data included demographics, motivations, and pregnancy intentions for each partner. Couples contributed 2894 menstrual cycles, most of which had data collected (by questionnaires and daily diary) on cycle-specific pregnancy intentions, days of potential fertility, and fertility behaviors. Pregnancies were prospectively actively ascertained.
resultsWe found a high concordance (91%) in cycle pregnancy intentions between partners. However, 44% of cycles with strong intentions to avoid pregnancy included intercourse on potentially fertile days or days of undetermined fertility status. Across all sensitivity scenarios, cumulative 13-cycle pregnancy rates with cycle intention to conceive ranged from 88.0% to 89.8%, and cumulative 13-cycle pregnancy rates with cycle intention to avoid ranged from 29.1% to 35.3%. In multivariate analysis, baseline motivations and intentions for pregnancy within 2 years were strongly correlated with the likelihood of pregnancy, more so than cycle intentions.
conclusionThe findings suggest that in some populations using natural family planning, baseline motivations and intentions may be more strongly related to pregnancy rates than cycle intentions. Our findings also highlight essential elements for evaluating correct use, including complete recording of intercourse and its timing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.