A Bayesian Joint Model of Menstrual Cycle Length and Fecundity

Overview

Journal Biometrics

Publisher Oxford University Press

Specialty Public Health

Date 2015 Aug 22

PMID 26295923

Citations 6

Authors

Kirsten J Lum

Rajeshwari Sundaram

Germaine M Buck Louis

Thomas A Louis

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Menstrual cycle length (MCL) has been shown to play an important role in couple fecundity, which is the biologic capacity for reproduction irrespective of pregnancy intentions. However, a comprehensive assessment of its role requires a fecundity model that accounts for male and female attributes and the couple's intercourse pattern relative to the ovulation day. To this end, we employ a Bayesian joint model for MCL and pregnancy. MCLs follow a scale multiplied (accelerated) mixture model with Gaussian and Gumbel components; the pregnancy model includes MCL as a covariate and computes the cycle-specific probability of pregnancy in a menstrual cycle conditional on the pattern of intercourse and no previous fertilization. Day-specific fertilization probability is modeled using natural, cubic splines. We analyze data from the Longitudinal Investigation of Fertility and the Environment Study (the LIFE Study), a couple based prospective pregnancy study, and find a statistically significant quadratic relation between fecundity and menstrual cycle length, after adjustment for intercourse pattern and other attributes, including male semen quality, both partner's age, and active smoking status (determined by baseline cotinine level 100 ng/mL). We compare results to those produced by a more basic model and show the advantages of a more comprehensive approach.

Citing Articles

Evaluating Pregnancy Rates in Fertility Awareness-Based Methods for Family Planning: Simulated Comparison of Correct Use to Avoid, Method-Related, and Total Pregnancy Rates.

Stanford J, Duane M, Simmons R Linacre Q. 2024; 91(3):315-328.

PMID: 39104463 PMC: 11298100. DOI: 10.1177/00243639231212440.

A Model-Based Approach to Detection Limits in Studying Environmental Exposures and Human Fecundity.

Kim S, Chen Z, Perkins N, Schisterman E, Buck Louis G Stat Biosci. 2020; 11(3):524-547.

PMID: 33072224 PMC: 7561047. DOI: 10.1007/s12561-019-09243-5.

Predicting pregnancy using large-scale data from a women's health tracking mobile application.

Liu B, Shi S, Wu Y, Thomas D, Symul L, Pierson E Proc Int World Wide Web Conf. 2019; 2019:2999-3005.

PMID: 31538145 PMC: 6752881. DOI: 10.1145/3308558.3313512.

The forecasting of menstruation based on a state-space modeling of basal body temperature time series.

Fukaya K, Kawamori A, Osada Y, Kitazawa M, Ishiguro M Stat Med. 2017; 36(21):3361-3379.

PMID: 28543214 PMC: 5575519. DOI: 10.1002/sim.7345.

Is human fecundity changing? A discussion of research and data gaps precluding us from having an answer.

Smarr M, Sapra K, Gemmill A, Kahn L, Wise L, Lynch C Hum Reprod. 2017; 32(3):499-504.

PMID: 28137753 PMC: 5850610. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dew361.

References

McLain A, Lum K, Sundaram R . A joint mixed effects dispersion model for menstrual cycle length and time-to-pregnancy. Biometrics. 2012; 68(2):648-56. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01711.x. View

Weinberg C, Gladen B, Wilcox A . Models relating the timing of intercourse to the probability of conception and the sex of the baby. Biometrics. 1994; 50(2):358-67. View

Dunson D, Stanford J . Bayesian inferences on predictors of conception probabilities. Biometrics. 2005; 61(1):126-33. DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2005.031231.x. View

Kolstad H, Bonde J, Hjollund N, Jensen T, Henriksen T, Ernst E . Menstrual cycle pattern and fertility: a prospective follow-up study of pregnancy and early embryonal loss in 295 couples who were planning their first pregnancy. Fertil Steril. 1999; 71(3):490-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00474-9. View

Wall M, Johnson J, Jacob P, Benowitz N . Cotinine in the serum, saliva, and urine of nonsmokers, passive smokers, and active smokers. Am J Public Health. 1988; 78(6):699-701. PMC: 1350288. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.78.6.699. View

Cooper T, Noonan E, von Eckardstein S, Auger J, Baker H, Behre H . World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update. 2009; 16(3):231-45. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmp048. View

Louis T, Zeger S . Effective communication of standard errors and confidence intervals. Biostatistics. 2008; 10(1):1-2. PMC: 2639348. DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxn014. View

Lin X, Raz J, Harlow S . Linear mixed models with heterogeneous within-cluster variances. Biometrics. 1997; 53(3):910-23. View

Harlow S, Lin X, Ho M . Analysis of menstrual diary data across the reproductive life span applicability of the bipartite model approach and the importance of within-woman variance. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000; 53(7):722-33. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00202-4. View

10.

Royston P, Ferreira A . A new approach to modeling daily probabilities of conception. Biometrics. 2001; 55(4):1005-13. DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.1999.01005.x. View

11.

Small C, Manatunga A, Klein M, Feigelson H, Dominguez C, McChesney R . Menstrual cycle characteristics: associations with fertility and spontaneous abortion. Epidemiology. 2005; 17(1):52-60. DOI: 10.1097/01.ede.0000190540.95748.e6. View

12.

Ecochard R . Heterogeneity in fecundability studies: issues and modelling. Stat Methods Med Res. 2006; 15(2):141-60. DOI: 10.1191/0962280206sm436oa. View

13.

Murphy S, Bentley G, OHanesian M . An analysis for menstrual data with time-varying covariates. Stat Med. 1995; 14(17):1843-57. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780141702. View

14.

Dominik R, Zhou H, Cai J . A statistical model for the evaluation of barrier contraceptive efficacy. Stat Med. 2001; 20(21):3279-94. DOI: 10.1002/sim.965. View

15.

Huang X, Elliott M, Harlow S . Modeling Menstrual Cycle Length and Variability at the Approach of Menopause Using Hierarchical Change Point Models. J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat. 2014; 63(3):445-466. PMC: 3979630. DOI: 10.1111/rssc.12044. View

16.

Lum K, Sundaram R, Louis T . Accounting for length-bias and selection effects in estimating the distribution of menstrual cycle length. Biostatistics. 2014; 16(1):113-28. PMC: 4263226. DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxu035. View

17.

Harlow S, Zeger S . An application of longitudinal methods to the analysis of menstrual diary data. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991; 44(10):1015-25. DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(91)90003-r. View

18.

Guo Y, Manatunga A, Chen S, Marcus M . Modeling menstrual cycle length using a mixture distribution. Biostatistics. 2005; 7(1):100-14. DOI: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxi043. View

19.

Keulers M, Hamilton C, Franx A, Evers J, Bots R . The length of the fertile window is associated with the chance of spontaneously conceiving an ongoing pregnancy in subfertile couples. Hum Reprod. 2007; 22(6):1652-6. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dem051. View

20.

Buck Louis G, Schisterman E, Sweeney A, Wilcosky T, Gore-Langton R, Lynch C . Designing prospective cohort studies for assessing reproductive and developmental toxicity during sensitive windows of human reproduction and development--the LIFE Study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2011; 25(5):413-24. PMC: 4118054. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2011.01205.x. View