Chronological aspects of ultrasonic, hormonal, and other indirect indices of ovulation
Abstract
Objective To improve prediction of ovulation in normal cycles. Design Collection of women's characteristics and their menstrual cycles. Monitoring and analysis of time relationships between several indicators of ovulation: transvaginal ultrasonography, cervical mucus, basal body temperature, urinary luteinising hormone, and ratio of urinary oestrogen to progesterone metabolites. Setting Each of eight natural family planning clinics was to study 12 women for at least three cycles. Population One hundred and seven normally fertile and cycling women aged 18 to 45. Methods Daily measurements of urinary luteinising hormone, follicle stimulating hormone, oestrone‐3‐glucuronide and pregnanediol‐3 α‐glucuronide. Basal body temperature recording and cervical mucus checking. Transvaginal ultrasound examination of the ovaries. Main outcome measures Delays between the expected day of ovulation according to the luteinising hormone peak or to ultrasound evidence and the expected days according to the other indices of ovulation. Results Ultrasonography was able to show evidence of ovulation in 283 out of 326 cycles. The average time lag between luteinising hormone peak and ultrasound evidence was less than one day (+0.46) but premature and late luteinising hormone‐expected date of ovulation were observed in nearly 10% and 23% of cycles, respectively. Basal body temperature rise was observed in 98% of cycles. Cervical mucus peak symptom, rapid drop in the ratio of urinary metabolites, and luteinising hormone initial rise were all close to ultrasonographic evidence in more than 72% of cycles. Conclusions For accuracy and practical reasons, the cervical mucus peak symptom, the ratio of urinary metabolites and luteinising hormone initial rise might be better indices of ovulation than the luteinising hormone peak.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In a comprehensive study by Ecochard et al., the FHP was most often 2 days after the LH peak.
“similar to a comprehensive study of different markers of ovulation by Ecochard et al.45 where the FHP was most often 2 days after the LH peak.”
From Real-world menstrual cycle characteristics of more than 600,000 menstrual cycles (2019) · cites this paper as [45]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 28 · Cited by 149
- Authors
- Ecochard, R., Boehringer, H., Rabilloud, M., & Marret, H.
- Affiliations
- Quidel Corporation (United States) (US)
- Hospices Civils de Lyon (FR)
- Venue
- BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-08
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 822-829
- ISSN
- 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-0328
- 1471-0528
- OpenAlex
- W2027441909
- Cited by
- 149
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 2.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian function and disorders
- Keywords
- ovulation prediction, luteinizing hormone, transvaginal ultrasound, cervical mucus, basal body temperature, follicle-stimulating hormone, natural family planning, menstrual cycle
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Body Temperature, Cervix Mucus, Estrogens, Female, Humans, Luteinizing Hormone, Middle Aged, Ovary, Ovulation, Time Factors, Ultrasonography
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review