Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in Am. J. Epidemiol.
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Joffe, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Joffe, M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Am J Epidemiol 2003; 157:89-93.
Copyright © 2003 by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health


COMMENTARIES

Invited Commentary: The Potential for Monitoring of Fecundity and the Remaining Challenges

Michael Joffe

From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Imperial College Faculty of Medicine, London, United Kingdom.

In the epidemiologic study of reproductive capacity, the assessment of fecundity as a functional measure is complementary to approaches that focus on biomedical mechanisms and/or that use biomarkers such as semen quality. More research is needed on time trends, spatial patterns, and particular groups, especially those exposed to potentially toxic agents. Although specific research projects will always be important, much could be gained by general population surveillance, which could be introduced into existing multipurpose surveys and repeated periodically. The core measurement would be time to pregnancy, which can be carried out using a short, acceptable questionnaire that has good validity at the group level. This should be accompanied by questions on time periods of unprotected intercourse that do not end with conception, to avoid bias resulting from exclusion of relatively infertile couples. Information is also required on contraceptive failures, recent contraceptive use, and other covariates and possibly on behavioral variables, such as the degree of planning and persistence in trying to conceive, and couples’ knowledge of fertile days of the menstrual cycle. Existing statistical methods can deal with possible biases due to "accidental" pregnancies and the effects of fertility treatment. Further methodological work is needed to avoid or measure more subtle biases, for example, to determine the best way to deal with pregnancies occurring to couples whose approach to family formation is relaxed, for whom the concept of "pregnancy planning" does not apply.

data collection; fertility; infertility; monitoring, physiologic; reproduction


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in Am. J. Epidemiol.:

Invited Commentary: Monitoring Fecundity over Time—If We Do It, Then Let’s Do It Right
Jørn Olsen and Pamela Rachootin
Am. J. Epidemiol. 2003 157: 94-97. [Abstract] [FREE Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
J. B. Stanford and D. B. Dunson
Effects of Sexual Intercourse Patterns in Time to Pregnancy Studies
Am. J. Epidemiol., May 1, 2007; 165(9): 1088 - 1095.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
R.M. Ferrari, M.A. Cooney, A. Vexler, A. Liu, and G.M. Buck Louis
Time to pregnancy and multiple births
Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2007; 22(2): 407 - 413.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Occup Med (Lond)Home page
T. K. Jensen, J. P. Bonde, and M. Joffe
The influence of occupational exposure on male reproductive function
Occup. Med., December 1, 2006; 56(8): 544 - 553.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
A. Jahn, K. W.M. Bloemenkamp, P. Hannaford, J. Olsen, M. O. da Silva, M. Temmerman, and on behalf of the Reprostat Steering Committee
Monitoring reproductive health in Europe--what are the best indicators of reproductive health?
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2006; 21(9): 2199 - 2200.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
M. Joffe, J. Key, N. Best, N. Keiding, T. Scheike, and T. K. Jensen
Studying Time to Pregnancy by Use of a Retrospective Design
Am. J. Epidemiol., July 15, 2005; 162(2): 115 - 124.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
T. K. Jensen, M. Joffe, T. Scheike, A. Skytthe, D. Gaist, and K. Christensen
Time trends in waiting time to pregnancy among Danish twins
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2005; 20(4): 955 - 964.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
K.K. Ng, R. Donat, L. Chan, A. Lalak, I. Di Pierro, and D.J. Handelsman
Sperm output of older men
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2004; 19(8): 1811 - 1815.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
J. Olsen and P. Rachootin
Invited Commentary: Monitoring Fecundity over Time--If We Do It, Then Let's Do It Right
Am. J. Epidemiol., January 15, 2003; 157(2): 94 - 97.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.