Efficacy of natural family planning methods

  • Marquette University ROR
  • Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf ROR

The European journal of contraception & reproductive health care : the official journal of the European Society of Contraception, 15(5), 380-382

DOI 10.5840/em2019441217 Source

Abstract

This letter to the editor discusses a review article commenting on the efficacy of contraceptive methods. It takes issue with section focused on natural family planning methods (Billings ovulation method calendar methods symptothermal method etc) and finds fault with the authors not differentiating between the various natural methods. It states that if the authors consider it appropriate to differentiate between the various hormonal contraceptives then differentiation between the natural methods is mandatory.

Topics

natural family planning methods efficacy differentiation, Freundl NFP effectiveness letter to editor, Billings ovulation method vs symptothermal method efficacy, differentiating natural family planning methods contraceptive review, calendar method vs cervical mucus method effectiveness, natural family planning efficacy rates comparison, fertility awareness based methods classification accuracy, NFP method-specific effectiveness data hormonal contraceptive comparison, natural methods contraception evidence review critique
DOI 10.5840/em2019441217 10.5840/em2019441217

Cite this article

Freundl, G. (2010). Efficacy of natural family planning methods. *The European journal of contraception & reproductive health care : the official journal of the European Society of Contraception*, *15*(5), 380-382. https://doi.org/10.3109/13625187.2010.507889

Related articles