-
Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. · Oct 1981
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA randomized prospective study of the use-effectiveness of two methods of natural family planning.
- M E Wade, P McCarthy, G D Braunstein, J R Abernathy, C M Suchindran, G S Harris, H C Danzer, and W A Uricchio.
- Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1981 Oct 15; 141 (4): 368-76.
AbstractThe final results of a prospective comparative study of two methods of natural family planning indicate a significant difference in the 12 month net cumulative pregnancy rates between the ovulation and symptothermal methods. These differences are on the order of two to one in favor of the symptothermal method. Pearl pregnancy rates confirm similar differentials between the two methods. Dropout rates for both methods were high. Lack of interest or dissatisfaction with the method was the major reason for dropout training while pregnancy or desire for pregnancy were the major reasons for dropout during the formal phase of the study.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*,_underline_or**bold**. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>and subscript<sub>text</sub>. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3., hyphens-or asterisks*. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com) - Images can be included with:
 - For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote..