Here's a guest post, with a request, from bearingblog friend, commenter, and epidemiologist Christy Porucznik, PhD, Assistant Professor in the Division of Public Health at the University of Utah. The good Dr. Porucznik writes:
Natural Family Planning (NFP) is a topic of interest to many different people. There are many different NFP methods based upon systematic observation of biomarkers – changes in cervical fluid and basal body temperature. There has been rigorous research on some of the methods.
The Creighton Model FertilityCare System is a natural family planning method that teaches couples to recognize and chart the signs of fertility and infertility in the woman’s cycle and to use that knowledge to either achieve or avoid a pregnancy. The method is natural, safe and effective, and it helps the couple understand their fertility. Trained practitioners at FertilityCare Centers teach the Creighton Model across the country and internationally.
One facet of all types of NFP that doesn't translate well to research methods generally used for 'contraceptives' is the ability to use the method both to avoid a pregnancy and to achieve a pregnancy. In usual contraception research, women planning to avoid pregnancy for a year are recruited into the study given the method to be researched and every pregnancy is considered to be a failure of the method.
University of Utah researchers are conducting an IRB-approved international study to evaluate the effectiveness of the Creighton Model for users wanting to avoid pregnancy. While past studies have shown that the Creighton Model is a highly effective method, this study will use new ways to measure how well it works. This is important because the knowledge gained will improve comparisons between the Creighton Model and other family planning methods. The study will also explore intentions and behaviors of couples to avoid or achieve a pregnancy.
Recruitment is ongoing. At least 300 couples will be needed to conduct the study. If you or someone you know are searching for a different method of family planning and wish to avoid pregnancy, you may be eligible for the study. Not only will you be learning about your own fertility, but you will also be contributing to important research that will help future users of the Creighton Model.
If you are interested or you would like to learn more about the Creighton Model or the study, please visithttp://medicine.utah.edu/dfpm/Research/CEIBA/index.htm, call 801-231-6434, or email us at ceibastudy@gmail.com.
This study is being funded by a grant through the Office of Population Affairs (under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) and the Health Studies Fund through the Department of Family and Preventive Medicine at the University of Utah.
If you have questions for ChristyP, either about whether you're eligible for the study or how you can promote it, feel free to leave questions in the comments.
bearing blog 
Comments
8 responses to “Guest post/bleg from ChristyP: Recruitment for an NFP study.”
I’ve got an obvious question: is this a way to learn Creighton at a reduced price? It’s kind of expensive if your insurance doesn’t cover it.
LikeLike
Are nursing mothers eligible? I tried to participate in a study of the Marquette model but they exclude nursing mothers.
LikeLike
I went and looked at the study criteria and I’m thrilled to see the intent to examine the relationship between “stated intent” to avoid/achieve pregnancy and actual sexual behavior. This is one of the things that sort of pisses me off about many NFP effectiveness studies – they often assume a toggle-switch kind of intent. In my discussions with lots of NFP users, particularly those with a Catholic or Catholic-flavored philosophy toward child-spacing and family size, “intent” can be quite fluid.
LikeLike
If I’m still waiting for my first postpartum period, does that count me out? I haven’t had any signs that it’s coming any time soon. My history is cycles returning at 9 mo and 14 mo postpartum and I’m currently 5.5 mo.
LikeLike
Jamie – breastfeeding women can be eligible if they have returned to cycles.
Amy — you could become eligible once you return to cycles, but I’ll bet that it doesn’t happen before we stop recruiting in March.
Regarding intention and effectiveness – this study is capturing changing intent way more than most studies, but it is still not perfect. Ideal would be asking people to rate pregnancy intention each day at the beginning of the day. That becomes unwieldy, and data quality may be an issue.
We would love to have been able to offer the instruction at a reduced price or free for the study, but the budget just doesn’t allow. Offering free instruction for study members could also create some selection bias and damage the generalizability of the study — people learning for free (effectively getting a lot of compensation for participating b/c as you say it is $$) may have different motivation than then average CrM or NFP user, and the greater scientific community would use that to try and discredit the findings.
MN is one of the only states where insurance will pay for instruction, but most FertilityCare Centers offer a sliding scale based upon income and family size. I have even heard of some parishes subsidizing the cost of instruction, so if you are interested and think that cost is a barrier, it is worth asking some questions.
LikeLike
This sounds very interesting. I have a few questions:
Is this for women whose cycles have settled into a postpartum routine? My cycle just returned at 6 mo. postpartum, but I’m still in that long ambiguous phase.
Do you have to know Creighton specifically? I observe mucus, of course, but I like me my thermometer too.
LikeLike
We are accepting women who have had their first postpartum menstrual flow regardless of the cycle regularity.
The study is for people learning Creighton and using it to avoid. One issue in NFP studies is lack of systematic protocol, so we are only including people who have learned Creighton.
LikeLike
this post is fantastic Topless Lolita Nude Pictures
xfrya Top Pre Lolita Sites
LikeLike