0

Methods used to self-predict ovulation. A comparative study

Fehring RJ, 1990

Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN, 19(3), 233-237

DOI 10.1111/j.1552-6909.1990.tb01642.x PMID 2358920 Source

Abstract

Time of ovulation as detected by a self-test of luteinizing hormone (LH) in the urine was compared with time of ovulation as detected by self-observation of cervical mucus. Twenty regularly cycling women monitored their cervical mucus and urine LH for two complete menstrual cycles. Of the cycles that had an LH surge, 100% were on the peak day of cervical mucus or within three days before the peak day. Self-observation of cervical mucus, therefore, can be an accurate method of determining optimal fertility.

Topics

Diagnostics > Biomarker Monitoring > Cervical MucusRRM Methods > General FABM > Clinical OutcomesMenstrual Cycle > Biomarkers > Cervical MucusDiagnostics > Cycle Charting > Clinical Utility
cervical mucus versus urine LH testing, self-prediction of ovulation comparison, cervical mucus ovulation detection accuracy, peak day cervical mucus LH surge, ovulation prediction methods comparison, billings method versus ovulation kit, mucus observation fertility awareness, self-monitoring ovulation biomarkers, urine LH test versus cervical mucus, fertility awareness method validation, creighton model cervical mucus accuracy

Cite this article

Fehring, R. J. (1990). Methods used to self-predict ovulation. A comparative study. *Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN*, *19*(3), 233-237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1552-6909.1990.tb01642.x

Keywords

Adult, Cervix Uteri, Female, Humans, Luteinizing Hormone, Mucus, Ovulation Detection, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic

Related articles