根据月经跟踪应用程序用户的末次月经确定妊娠日期的准确性

IF 2.8 2区医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY

Contraception Pub Date : 2024-10-07 DOI:10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110614

C Kerestes, K Stone, M Tschann, E Berry, R Soon, B Kaneshiro

{"title":"根据月经跟踪应用程序用户的末次月经确定妊娠日期的准确性","authors":"C Kerestes, K Stone, M Tschann, E Berry, R Soon, B Kaneshiro","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>We sought to determine if period tracking application (app) users’ pregnancy dating by last menstrual period (LMP) and dating by ultrasound were more congruent than those who did not use apps.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a secondary analysis of data collected from the LMP-SURE study, which surveyed participants without prior ultrasound from abortion clinics in Alaska, Hawaiʻi, Idaho, and Utah about date and certainty of LMP, and use of period tracking apps. We obtained subsequent ultrasound dating by chart review. We compared agreement between LMP and ultrasound dating between those who did and did not use period tracking apps.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>1,025 participants started the survey and 730 participants had complete data including ultrasound dating and period app use. Of those, 288 (39.5%) used a period-tracking application. Among all analyzed responses, 367 (50.3%) reported being certain of their LMP date and 264 (36.2%) were fairly certain of LMP within one week. Of app users, 279 (96.9%) were certain or fairly certain of LMP, versus 352 (79.6%) of non-app users (<em>p<0.001</em>). Of those who tracked their periods with an app, 197 (56.6%) had a gestational age by LMP within five days of their gestational age by ultrasound, compared to 239 (45.2%) of non-app users (<em>p<0.001</em>).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Participants who used period tracking applications were significantly more likely to report an LMP-based gestational age that was within five days of their gestational age by ultrasound, although neither group had high congruence between LMP and ultrasound gestational age.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10762,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":"139 ","pages":"Article 110614"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ACCURACY OF GESTATIONAL DATING BY LAST MENSTRUAL PERIOD IN PERIOD-TRACKING APPLICATION USERS\",\"authors\":\"C Kerestes, K Stone, M Tschann, E Berry, R Soon, B Kaneshiro\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110614\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>We sought to determine if period tracking application (app) users’ pregnancy dating by last menstrual period (LMP) and dating by ultrasound were more congruent than those who did not use apps.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a secondary analysis of data collected from the LMP-SURE study, which surveyed participants without prior ultrasound from abortion clinics in Alaska, Hawaiʻi, Idaho, and Utah about date and certainty of LMP, and use of period tracking apps. We obtained subsequent ultrasound dating by chart review. We compared agreement between LMP and ultrasound dating between those who did and did not use period tracking apps.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>1,025 participants started the survey and 730 participants had complete data including ultrasound dating and period app use. Of those, 288 (39.5%) used a period-tracking application. Among all analyzed responses, 367 (50.3%) reported being certain of their LMP date and 264 (36.2%) were fairly certain of LMP within one week. Of app users, 279 (96.9%) were certain or fairly certain of LMP, versus 352 (79.6%) of non-app users (<em>p<0.001</em>). Of those who tracked their periods with an app, 197 (56.6%) had a gestational age by LMP within five days of their gestational age by ultrasound, compared to 239 (45.2%) of non-app users (<em>p<0.001</em>).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Participants who used period tracking applications were significantly more likely to report an LMP-based gestational age that was within five days of their gestational age by ultrasound, although neither group had high congruence between LMP and ultrasound gestational age.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10762,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contraception\",\"volume\":\"139 \",\"pages\":\"Article 110614\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contraception\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010782424003093\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010782424003093","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

方法我们对 LMP-SURE 研究收集的数据进行了二次分析，该研究调查了阿拉斯加州、夏威夷州、爱达荷州和犹他州人工流产诊所未进行超声波检查的参与者的 LMP 日期、LMP 的确定性以及月经跟踪应用程序的使用情况。我们通过病历审查获得了后续超声波检查的日期。我们比较了使用和不使用经期跟踪应用程序的人之间 LMP 和超声波日期的一致性。结果 1025 名参与者开始了调查，730 名参与者拥有完整的数据，包括超声波日期和经期应用程序的使用。其中，288 人（39.5%）使用了经期跟踪应用程序。在所有分析的回复中，367 人（50.3%）表示能确定其 LMP 日期，264 人（36.2%）能在一周内基本确定 LMP。在应用程序用户中，有 279 人（96.9%）确定或相当确定月经周期，而非应用程序用户则为 352 人（79.6%）（p<0.001）。结论使用经期跟踪应用程序的参与者更有可能报告 LMP 胎龄与超声波检查胎龄相差五天以内，尽管这两组人的 LMP 胎龄与超声波检查胎龄的一致性都不高。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

ACCURACY OF GESTATIONAL DATING BY LAST MENSTRUAL PERIOD IN PERIOD-TRACKING APPLICATION USERS

Objectives

We sought to determine if period tracking application (app) users’ pregnancy dating by last menstrual period (LMP) and dating by ultrasound were more congruent than those who did not use apps.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of data collected from the LMP-SURE study, which surveyed participants without prior ultrasound from abortion clinics in Alaska, Hawaiʻi, Idaho, and Utah about date and certainty of LMP, and use of period tracking apps. We obtained subsequent ultrasound dating by chart review. We compared agreement between LMP and ultrasound dating between those who did and did not use period tracking apps.

Results

1,025 participants started the survey and 730 participants had complete data including ultrasound dating and period app use. Of those, 288 (39.5%) used a period-tracking application. Among all analyzed responses, 367 (50.3%) reported being certain of their LMP date and 264 (36.2%) were fairly certain of LMP within one week. Of app users, 279 (96.9%) were certain or fairly certain of LMP, versus 352 (79.6%) of non-app users (p<0.001). Of those who tracked their periods with an app, 197 (56.6%) had a gestational age by LMP within five days of their gestational age by ultrasound, compared to 239 (45.2%) of non-app users (p<0.001).

Conclusions

Participants who used period tracking applications were significantly more likely to report an LMP-based gestational age that was within five days of their gestational age by ultrasound, although neither group had high congruence between LMP and ultrasound gestational age.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Contraception 医学-妇产科学

CiteScore

4.70

自引率

17.20%

发文量

211

审稿时长

69 days

期刊介绍： Contraception has an open access mirror journal Contraception: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. The journal Contraception wishes to advance reproductive health through the rapid publication of the best and most interesting new scholarship regarding contraception and related fields such as abortion. The journal welcomes manuscripts from investigators working in the laboratory, clinical and social sciences, as well as public health and health professions education.