Skip Navigation



Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on January 13, 2005
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/deh723
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/4/955    most recent
deh723v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jensen, T. K.
Right arrow Articles by Christensen, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jensen, T. K.
Right arrow Articles by Christensen, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction © European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology 2005; all rights reserved
Received October 28, 2004
Revised December 8, 2004
Accepted December 8, 2004

Article

Time trends in waiting time to pregnancy among Danish twins

Tina Kold Jensen 1*, Mike Joffe 2, Thomas Scheike 3, Axel Skytthe 4, David Gaist 4, and Kaare Christensen 4

1 Department of Environmental Medicine, University of Southern Denmark, Institute of Public Health, 5000 Odense C, Denmark
2 Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine (St Mary's Campus), Imperial College, London, UK
3 Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, 2200 Copenhagen, Denmark
4 Department of Epidemiology, University of Southern Denmark, Institute of Public Health, 5000 Odense C, Denmark

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Tina Kold Jensen, E-mail: tkjensen{at}health.sdu.dk


  Abstract

BACKGROUND: Little is known about time trends in fecundity because few population-based data are available. In a survey among female twins born from 1953 to 1976, their time to pregnancy did not differ from singletons and can be considered to represent the fecundity of the general population. METHODS: Information was collected by interview about waiting time to first pregnancy (TTP) and any periods of subfecundity among both male and female twins born between 1931 and 1952. Trends were analysed by considering the year of birth of the index person (birth cohort effect) or year at which the first attempt started (period effect). RESULTS: Eighty-five percent of male and 81.3% of female eligible twins participated. A total of 1598 male twins and 1653 female twins reported a TTP value and 1671 men and 1715 women had a value for their first attempt to conceive including unsuccessful attempts. No overall trends in either male or female TTP were observed with increasing year of birth or of starting time, after adjustment for confounders, but for attempts fecundity increased among female twins by year of birth or of starting the attempt. A decreasing risk of severe infertility with increasing year of birth or year for start of the attempt was observed among male twins, but this observation was based on only 81 men and was not seen among female twins. CONCLUSION: No decreasing trend in fecundity was observed among Danish twins born between 1931 and 1952 who had completed their reproduction. Female twins had a slight increase in fecundity, and men a decrease in severe infertility. In addition, TTP was apparently well reported and recalled for up to 50 years among both male and female twins.

Keywords: fertility; time to pregnancy; time trends; twins.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
L. A. Wise, K. J. Rothman, E. M. Mikkelsen, H. T. Sorensen, A. Riis, and E. E. Hatch
An internet-based prospective study of body size and time-to-pregnancy
Hum. Reprod., October 14, 2009; (2009) dep360v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
S. Bhattacharya, M. Porter, E. Amalraj, A. Templeton, M. Hamilton, A.J. Lee, and J.J. Kurinczuk
The epidemiology of infertility in the North East of Scotland
Hum. Reprod., August 14, 2009; (2009) dep287v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M. Joffe, J. Key, N. Best, T.K. Jensen, and N. Keiding
The role of biological fertility in predicting family size
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2009; 24(8): 1999 - 2006.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
J. Key, N. Best, M. Joffe, T. K. Jensen, and N. Keiding
Methodological Issues in Analyzing Time Trends in Biologic Fertility: Protection Bias
Am. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2009; 169(3): 285 - 293.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
J. P. E. Bonde and J. Olsen
Interpreting trends in fecundity over time
BMJ, February 16, 2008; 336(7640): 339 - 340.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
C. Asklund, N. Jorgensen, N.E. Skakkebaek, and T.K. Jensen
Increased frequency of reproductive health problems among fathers of boys with hypospadias
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2007; 22(10): 2639 - 2646.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
M. Joffe, J. Key, N. Best, N. Keiding, T. Scheike, and T. K. Jensen
Studying Time to Pregnancy by Use of a Retrospective Design
Am. J. Epidemiol., July 15, 2005; 162(2): 115 - 124.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.