A new study released on Monday by the Journal of Medical Internet Research reveals that the calendar-tracking method, often referred to as the rhythm method, is less accurate than other fertility tracking methods. The study, led by experts from Oura, suggests that the company’s physiology method, used in its Fertile Window feature, offers more reliable results for predicting ovulation.
The study analyzed data from 964 participants and 1,155 menstrual cycles, collected using the Oura Ring 3, released in 2021. Oura’s physiology method, which is central to its Fertile Window feature, accurately predicted ovulation in 96.4% of cycles, compared to the calendar method, which had an average error of 3.44 days. In contrast, Oura’s method produced a much smaller error margin of just 1.26 days.
The Fertile Window feature, powered by Oura’s physiology method, helps users track their most fertile days, which can assist those trying to conceive or avoid pregnancy. Oura also partners with Natural Cycles, a hormone-free birth control brand, to offer users more insight into their fertility status by monitoring body temperature.
The Oura physiology method works through an algorithm developed using data from 30,000 menstrual cycles. This algorithm analyzes users’ temperature data to accurately estimate ovulation dates. The study found that 82% of cycle predictions using the Oura Ring were within two days of the actual ovulation date, compared to just 32.5% accuracy from the calendar method.
The study’s authors concluded that the physiology method outperformed the calendar method across various cycle lengths, age groups, and levels of cycle variability. It was also significantly more accurate than ovulation tracking through wrist wearables like Garmin and Apple Watches, which only detected ovulation between 54% and 86% of the time.
While the physiology method performed best, it was noted that its accuracy decreased with shorter or irregular cycles. However, it showed consistent results across typical and long cycles, providing reliable data for most users.
Researchers suggested that while the calendar method might still be used in some cases, especially when insufficient physiological data is available, it should be used cautiously, particularly by those with irregular cycles. They emphasized that Oura’s physiology method is a more reliable tool for estimating ovulation and can be especially useful for both conception and pregnancy prevention.
This study highlights the growing accuracy of wearable technology in tracking reproductive health and positions the Oura Ring as a top contender in the field of fertility tracking.
Related topics:
- New Model Sheds Light on Environmental Impact on Reproductive Health
- Understanding Infertility: Causes, Symptoms, and Treatment Options
- AI Model Offers New Way to Screen for Male Infertility
