Use of period- or fertility-tracking technologies pre- and post-Dobbs.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate whether the use of period- or fertility-tracking technologies decreased from pre- to post-Dobbs and to identify user characteristics and changes in reasons for use.

Study design: We used data from the Surveys of Women, population-based surveys on reproductive health among self-identified women aged 18 to 44 years, conducted in five states. We compared the prevalence of use of period- or fertility-tracking technologies and reasons for use pre-Dobbs (2018-2019 in Iowa and Ohio; 2019-2020 in Arizona, New Jersey, and Wisconsin) and post-Dobbs (2022-2023 in all five states), overall and stratified by state. To examine the prevalence of use, we adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, education level, and marital status.

Results: Period- or fertility-tracking technology use increased from pre-Dobbs to post-Dobbs overall, with an adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) of 1.20 (95% CI 1.15-1.26). User prevalence increased in four of the five states: Arizona (aPR = 1.17; 95% CI 1.06-1.30), Iowa (aPR = 1.32; 95% CI 1.19-1.47), New Jersey (aPR = 1.21; 95% CI 1.11-1.31), and Ohio (aPR = 1.28; 95% CI 1.16-1.40); prevalence was unchanged in Wisconsin (aPR = 1.06; 95% CI 0.95-1.18). The only change in the reason for use was a decrease in reports of using an app "to become pregnant" post-Dobbs (aPR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.75-0.97).

Conclusions: The increase in period- or fertility-tracking technology use pre- to post-Dobbs may demonstrate that data privacy was less of an issue for users than anticipated.

Implications: While the Dobbs decision led legal and data privacy experts, media, and reproductive health advocates on social media to warn period- or fertility-tracking technology users to delete their tracking technology out of concern for data privacy and potential prosecution for abortion, the prevalence of technology users instead increased from pre- to post-Dobbs.