Abstract
Life‐table methods used for the analysis and interpretation of contraceptive follow‐up studies differ from those used in other areas of medical research. The historical development of these methods in the contraceptive literature is outlined and the two main methods are discussed, compared and shown to differ mainly in their nomenclature; their results are very similar in practice. The daily life‐table method is simpler to apply and interpret, and facilitates analysis using the logrank statistic as well as powerful regression modelling techniques for survival data.