Search

Study Question: To what extent is socioeconomic status (SES), as measured by educational attainment and household income, associated with fecundability in a cohort of Danish couples trying to conceive?, Summary Answer: In this preconception cohort, lower educational attainment and lower household income were associated with lower fecundability after adjusting for potential confounders., What Is Known Already: Approximately 15% of couples are affected by infertility. Socioeconomic disparities in health are well established. However, little is known about socioeconomic disparity and its relation to fertility., Study Design, Size, Duration: This is a cohort study of Danish females aged 18-49 years who were trying to conceive between 2007 and 2021. Information was collected via baseline and bi-monthly follow-up questionnaires for 12 months or until reported pregnancy., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Overall, 10 475 participants contributed 38 629 menstrual cycles and 6554 pregnancies during a maximum of 12 cycles of follow-up. We used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% CIs., Main Results and the Role of Chance: Compared with upper tertiary education (highest level), fecundability was substantially lower for primary and secondary school (FR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.62-0.85), upper secondary school (FR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.79-1.00), vocational education (FR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.75-0.89), and lower tertiary education (FR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.80-0.95), but not for middle tertiary education (FR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.93-1.03). Compared with a monthly household income of >65 000 DKK, fecundability was lower for household income <25 000 DKK (FR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.72-0.85), 25 000-39 000 DKK (FR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.82-0.94), and 40 000-65 000 DKK (FR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.88-0.99). The results did not change appreciably after adjustment for potential confounders., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: We used educational attainment and household income as indicators of SES. However, SES is a complex concept, and these indicators may not reflect all aspects of SES. The study recruited couples planning to conceive, including the full spectrum of fertility from less fertile to highly fertile individuals. Our results may generalize to most couples who are trying to conceive., Wider Implications of the Findings: Our results are consistent with the literature indicating well-documented inequities in health across socioeconomic groups. The associations for income were surprisingly strong considering the Danish welfare state. These results indicate that the redistributive welfare system in Denmark does not suffice to eradicate inequities in reproductive health., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The study was supported by the Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital, and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (RO1-HD086742, R21-HD050264, and R01-HD060680). The authors declare no conflict of interest., Trial Registration Number: N/A., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Little is known about potential health effects of eating organic food in relation to reproduction., Objective: We examined associations between organic food consumption and fecundability., Methods: Data were derived from a preconception cohort study of Danish couples trying to conceive (SnartForaeldre.dk, SF). Participants completed a baseline questionnaire on socio-demographics, anthropometrics and lifestyle and a validated food-frequency questionnaire, which included questions on proportions of organic food consumed within six food groups. Participants were followed up with bimonthly questionnaires for up to 12 months or until pregnancy. Analyses were restricted to 2061 participants attempting pregnancy for ≤6 cycles at enrollment and 1303 with <3 cycles. Fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated by proportional probabilities regression models adjusted for potential confounders including age, lifestyle and socioeconomic factors. Associations were examined for vegetables, fruits, cereals, dairy products, eggs and meat, separately, and for the overall pattern of organic food consumption (organic sum score)., Results: The final analytic sample comprised 2069 participants. In the full cohort, organic food consumption was not meaningfully associated with fecundability. Among participants <3 cycles of pregnancy attempt at study entry (n = 1303), the FR was 1.11 (95% CI 0.93, 1.33) for the category 'less than half', for 'more than half' the FR was 1.17 (95% CI 0.99, 1.38) and for 'almost everything' the FR was 1.12 (95% CI 0.97, 1.28)., Conclusion: Higher consumption of organic foods was not meaningfully associated with fecundability, although slightly greater fecundability was seen among participants with <3 cycles of pregnancy attempt time., (© 2022 The Authors. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Study Question: To what extent is dietary folate intake and total folate intake (dietary and supplemental intakes) associated with fecundability, the per cycle probability of conception?, Summary Answer: Preconception dietary folate intake was positively associated with fecundability in a monotonic pattern., What Is Known Already: Supplemental folic acid has been associated with improved fertility, but little is known about the relation between dietary folate and fecundability., Study Design, Size, Duration: A prospective cohort study including 9559 women trying to conceive without fertility treatment and enrolled in the period 2013-2020., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: We used data from two internet-based prospective cohort studies of pregnancy planners from Denmark, where folic acid fortification is not performed (SnartForældre.dk (SF); n = 3755) and North America, where the food supply is fortified with folic acid (Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO); n = 5804). Women contributed menstrual cycles at risk until they reported conception or experienced a censoring event. We used proportional probabilities regression models to compute fecundability ratios (FRs) and 95% CI, adjusting for potential confounders., Main Results and the Role of Chance: Compared with a dietary folate intake ≥400 µg/day, the adjusted FRs for women in SF were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.99) for intake 250-399 µg/day, and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.68-0.94) for intake of <250 µg/day. The corresponding FRs in PRESTO were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.89-1.01) and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.65-1.00). Compared with the highest level of total folate intake (diet folate ≥400 µg/day plus folic acid supplementation), in both cohorts fecundability was lowest among women with the lowest dietary intake <250 µg/day dietary folate and no supplementation (FR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.59-0.98 [SF] and 0.49, 95% CI: 0.31-0.77 [PRESTO]). Further, total intake dietary folate <250 µg/day plus supplementation was associated with reduced fecundability for SF participants (FR; 0.79, 95% CI: 0.65-0.98) and for PRESTO participants (FR; 0.92, 95% CI: 0.72-1.16)., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: It is unknown whether dietary folate and folic acid intake affect fecundability on its own or if there is an interaction with other micronutrients provided in healthy diet. Thus, the observed associations may not reflect dietary folate intake alone, but overall healthy diet., Wider Implications of the Findings: Recommendations for preconception dietary folate intake and folic acid supplementation are of importance not only to prevent neural tube defects but also to enhance fecundability., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The study was supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01-HD086742). The authors report no competing interests., Trial Registration Number: N/A., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background Objective Methods Results Conclusion The use of fertility indicators to predict ovulation has largely been studied for contraceptive purposes, while less so as fertility‐promoting tools.To investigate the association between fertility indicators and fecundability in Danish women trying to conceive.Web‐based preconception cohort study. We analysed data from 11,328 females aged 18–49 years trying to conceive without fertility treatment for ≤6 menstrual cycles, from the Danish SnartGravid.dk and SnartForældre.dk cohorts (2007–2023). Participants reported the use of fertility indicators (counting days since the last menstrual period, cervical fluid monitoring, urinary ovulation testing, feeling ovulation, using a smartphone fertility app and measuring basal body temperature [BBT]). Time to pregnancy was measured in menstrual cycles ascertained by self‐reported pregnancy status. We estimated fecundability ratios (FR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using proportional probabilities regression models adjusted for age, socio‐economic position, health indicators, reproductive history and gynaecological factors.Fertility indicators were used by 63.3% of participants at study entry. Counting days was the most common (46.9%), while measuring BBT was the least (3.0%). Other indicators ranged from 17.0% to 23.6%, with 69.7% using more than one indicator. Compared with non‐use, use of any fertility indicator was associated with greater fecundability (adjusted FR 1.14, 95% CI 1.08, 1.19). Cervical fluid monitoring showed the strongest association (aFR 1.46, 95% CI 1.03, 2.07), followed by urinary ovulation testing (aFR 1.35, 95% CI 1.16, 1.58) and counting days (aFR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09, 1.29). Feeling ovulation and fertility apps were modestly associated with fecundability, while measuring BBT was not associated. Sensitivity analysis restricting to ≤2 cycles of attempt time and two cycles of follow‐up showed an aFR for any indicator use of 1.21 (95% CI 1.13, 1.31).In this Danish preconception cohort, use of fertility indicators was associated with a higher fecundability, varying by type of indicator. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]