Cycle apps to avoid pregnancy—effective means or a game?
Gynakologe, ISSN: 1433-0393, Vol: 52, Issue: 2, Page: 90-97
2019
- 4Citations
- 20Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
This paper gives an overview of currently available cycle apps which indicate the fertile window of the menstrual cycle. Forecast apps, i. e., apps predicting the fertile window based on data of previous cycles (cycle lengths, previous temperature rises) are useless for contraception. Actually, highly effective family planning still needs evidence-based variations of the symptothermal method (see guidelines of the Section Natural Fertility of the German Society of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, DGGEF). However, corresponding apps need effectiveness studies according to scientific criteria as well. Apps which are associated with measuring systems (hormones in urine or saliva or new parameters like pulse rate) have not yet met the expectations because no parameter with the necessary accuracy has been found. The US Federal Drug Administration approval of the forecast app Natural Cycles is scientifically not understandable.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85056997941&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00129-018-4358-6; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00129-018-4358-6; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00129-018-4358-6.pdf; http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00129-018-4358-6/fulltext.html; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00129-018-4358-6; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00129-018-4358-6
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know