» Articles » PMID: 27375829

Flexible Bayesian Human Fecundity Models

Overview
Journal Bayesian Anal
Date 2016 Jul 5
PMID 27375829
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Human fecundity is an issue of considerable interest for both epidemiological and clinical audiences, and is dependent upon a couple's biologic capacity for reproduction coupled with behaviors that place a couple at risk for pregnancy. Bayesian hierarchical models have been proposed to better model the conception probabilities by accounting for the acts of intercourse around the day of ovulation, i.e., during the fertile window. These models can be viewed in the framework of a generalized nonlinear model with an exponential link. However, a fixed choice of link function may not always provide the best fit, leading to potentially biased estimates for probability of conception. Motivated by this, we propose a general class of models for fecundity by relaxing the choice of the link function under the generalized nonlinear model framework. We use a sample from the Oxford Conception Study (OCS) to illustrate the utility and fit of this general class of models for estimating human conception. Our findings reinforce the need for attention to be paid to the choice of link function in modeling conception, as it may bias the estimation of conception probabilities. Various properties of the proposed models are examined and a Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling algorithm was developed for implementing the Bayesian computations. The deviance information criterion measure and logarithm of pseudo marginal likelihood are used for guiding the choice of links. The supplemental material section contains technical details of the proof of the theorem stated in the paper, and contains further simulation results and analysis.

Citing Articles

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.


Peri-implantation intercourse does not lower fecundability.

Stanford J, Hansen J, Willis S, Hu N, Thomas A Hum Reprod. 2020; 35(9):2107-2112.

PMID: 32756956 PMC: 8660627. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deaa156.


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
1.
Dunson D, Weinberg C . Accounting for unreported and missing intercourse in human fertility studies. Stat Med. 2000; 19(5):665-79. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(20000315)19:5<665::aid-sim391>3.0.co;2-p. View

2.
Dunson D . Bayesian modeling of the level and duration of fertility in the menstrual cycle. Biometrics. 2002; 57(4):1067-73. DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2001.01067.x. View

3.
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

4.
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

5.
Pyper C, Bromhall L, Dummett S, Altman D, Brownbill P, Murphy M . The Oxford Conception Study design and recruitment experience. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2006; 20 Suppl 1:51-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2006.00771.x. View