Abstract Purpose of Review We reviewed the exposure assessments of ambient air pollution used in studies of fertility, fecundability, and pregnancy loss. Recent Findings Comprehensive literature searches were performed in the PUBMED, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Of 168 total studies, 45 met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. We find that 69% of fertility and pregnancy loss studies have used one-dimensional proximity models or surface monitor data, while only 35% have used the improved models, such as land-use regression models (4%), dispersion/chemical transport models (11%), or fusion models (20%). No published studies have used personal air monitors. Summary While air pollution exposure models have vastly improved over the past decade from a simple, one-dimensional distance or air monitor data to models that incorporate physiochemical properties leading to better predictive accuracy, precision, and increased spatiotemporal variability and resolution, the fertility literature has yet to fully incorporate these new methods. We provide descriptions of each of these air pollution exposure models and assess the strengths and limitations of each model, while summarizing the findings of the literature on ambient air pollution and fertility that apply each method.