Priority 20 from the Contraception PSP

UNCERTAINTY: How effective are 'natural family planning methods' (monitoring menstrual cycle, basal body temperature, cervical mucus), and do fertility apps and/or urine testing improve this?  (JLA PSP Priority 20)
Overall ranking 20
JLA question ID 0049/20
Explanatory note The systematic review is based on traditional methods. More recent attention has focused on using apps, several papers review different app protocols. One ongoing study evaluating a specific app was identified. NCT02833922; (Archived be WebCite at

Fertility awareness‐based methods for contraception David A Grimes, Maria F Gallo, Vera Halpern, Kavita Nanda, Kenneth F Schulz, Laureen M Lopez. October 2004 (updated 2012)

Assessing the Efficacy of an App-Based Method of Family Planning: The Dot Study Protocol. Simmons RG, Shattuck DC, Jennings VH. JMIR Res Protoc. 2017 Jan 18;6(1):e5. doi: 10.2196/resprot.6886.

Health Research Classification System category Reproductive Health and Childbirth
Extra information provided by this PSP
Original uncertainty examples

“Natural family planning and apps - how effective, which are best.” (Both) 

Submitted by Healthcare Professionals x 0~Patients x 1~Both x 1
PSP information
PSP unique ID 0049
PSP name Contraception
Total number of uncertainties identified by this PSP. 57  (To see a full list of all uncertainties identified, please see the detailed spreadsheet held on the JLA website)
Date of priority setting workshop 21 April 2017