A review of national data indicates that teen birthrates have been falling because teens are abstaining from sex, not because they’re using more condoms, a group of doctors say in a study released on Feb. 10.

This conclusion "refutes" efforts by federal agencies and advocacy groups to attribute the birthrate declines to contraceptive use, said the Consortium of State Physicians Resource Councils (PRC), which represents 2,000 health care professionals.

The PRC said the data show that both condom use and out-of-wedlock birthrates have increased among sexually active teen-age girls.

If improved condom use was bringing down birthrates overall, its impact should have been seen in this category of girls, said Dr. Joanna K. Mohn of Rahway, NJ.

Instead, the correlation is the "exact opposite"—"increased condom use and higher illegitimacy rates have gone hand in hand," she said.

National data further show that more teens – especially boys – are abstaining from sex, said Dr. John Diggs of South Hadley, Mass.

This behavioral change, which tracts the decline in teen birthrates, is likely due to HIV-AIDS education, abstinence education and growing cultural acceptance of saving sex for marriage, said Dr. Diggs.

Reps. Tom Coburn and Ernest Istook, both Oklahoma Republicans, said the PRC research shows the federal government’s $50 million-a-year abstinence education program is good public policy.

Abstinence messages are particularly important in light of the rapid spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), said Dr. Coburn. Condoms offer little or no protection against several STDs, including human papillomavirus, which can lead to cervical cancer in women, he said.

The PRC report, which was written by 11 doctors and peer-reviewed, challenges statements by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other groups that say the teen birthrate declines are largely a result of increased contraceptive use.

The CDC did not have an immediate comment.

The PRC also criticized an anti-abstinence editorial published in May in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

The JAMA editorial accompanied a Princeton University study that found that young teens who were taught about contraception were less sexually active a year later than teens who had abstinence education.

Dr. Mohn said the Princeton study was flawed because it did not use a genuine abstinence program. And the editorial was similarly flawed, said Dr. Coburn, "I will tell you that within JAMA, there is a bias against abstinence," the congressman said.

JAMA senior editor Phil Fontanarosa said that JAMA evaluates each study "on its own merit, without bias," and editorials are intended to "give context" to the findings.