A recent publication led by an Oxford University professor has called for more research into the accuracy of apps such as Clu, Flo, and Period Tracker. The authors note that most period tracking apps are designed with “Western assumptions”, such as monogamy and what should be considered a “normal” menstrual cycle, that limits their cultural relevance and effectiveness in other contexts.
The research, led by Oxford’s Dr. Franceso Rampazzo, further suggests that period tracking apps may be more popular where there is reduced accessibility to reproductive health services. It suggests that users in countries where there is an “unmet need for family planning” rely more on the apps as methods of birth control and for achieving pregnancy. The paper says that since such apps are designed for use in the “Global North”, the implication of such uses for the apps need to be studied in the “Global South”.
Co-author Dr Douglas Leasure also expressed concern about the “potential risks when private-sector app developers fill in for reproductive health professionals”, such as the monetisation of individual data that has been collected on a global scale.
Previous concerns have been raised about data privacy in these apps. A report in period app data security by the Information Commissioner’s Office in 2023 stated that 54% of women reported receiving “baby or fertility-related” adverts since signing up for the app. In the US, the overturning of federal abortion rights also led women to delete their period-tracking apps in fear that their data may be used to prosecute abortions.
61% of respondents, from across 112 countries, listed menstrual cycle tracking as their primary usage of the app. Achieving pregnancy was 22% and avoiding pregnancy was 8%. Statistics show that period app usage in South America was similar to that in Eastern Europe. The research was unable to find data for parts of Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and China.
