BACKGROUND: Assessing the psychological acceptability of technologies designed to assist couples in achieving pregnancy is complex. OBJECTIVE: The current study developed measures relating to the impact of one such technology on 52 couples' relationships, their feelings relating to pregnancy status and their feelings about the technology itself. METHODS: Pregnancy status and daily logs of sexual activity were recorded for four menstrual cycles, in addition to the completion of acceptability questionnaires. RESULTS: Baseline acceptability measures were more favorable among couples eventually achieving pregnancy. For couples not becoming pregnant, acceptability declined over time and relationships became more strained. Behavioral data clearly indicated a "targeting" and focusing of sexual activity in response to the information displayed by the monitor. CONCLUSION: Expectations of success, couple disagreements about prior failure and partner communication patterns appear to be related to pregnancy success when using such technology.
BACKGROUND: Assessing the psychological acceptability of technologies designed to assist couples in achieving pregnancy is complex. OBJECTIVE: The current study developed measures relating to the impact of one such technology on 52 couples' relationships, their feelings relating to pregnancy status and their feelings about the technology itself. METHODS: Pregnancy status and daily logs of sexual activity were recorded for four menstrual cycles, in addition to the completion of acceptability questionnaires. RESULTS: Baseline acceptability measures were more favorable among couples eventually achieving pregnancy. For couples not becoming pregnant, acceptability declined over time and relationships became more strained. Behavioral data clearly indicated a "targeting" and focusing of sexual activity in response to the information displayed by the monitor. CONCLUSION: Expectations of success, couple disagreements about prior failure and partner communication patterns appear to be related to pregnancy success when using such technology.
Authors: Kathleen M Morrow; Joseph L Fava; Rochelle K Rosen; Anna L Christensen; Sara Vargas; Candelaria Barroso Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Ping Teresa Yeh; Caitlin E Kennedy; Sheryl Van der Poel; Thabo Matsaseng; Laura Bernard; Manjulaa Narasimhan Journal: BMJ Glob Health Date: 2019-04-25
Authors: Roger J Hart; Thomas D'Hooghe; Eline A F Dancet; Ramón Aurell; Bruno Lunenfeld; Raoul Orvieto; Antonio Pellicer; Nikolaos P Polyzos; Wenjing Zheng Journal: Reprod Sci Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Lana Salih Joelsson; Anna Berglund; Kjell Wånggren; Mikael Lood; Andreas Rosenblad; Tanja Tydén Journal: Ups J Med Sci Date: 2016-05-23 Impact factor: 2.384