Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33745082›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2021

Evaluating the unevaluated: a secondary analysis of the National Survey for Family Growth (NSFG) examining infertile women who did not access care.

Sameer Thakker, Jesse Persily, Paxton Voigt, Jennifer Blakemore, Frederick Licciardi, Bobby B Najari

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Inequities in Medically Assisted Reproduction: a Scoping Review.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2023
    Article
  6. Infertility: still a largely uncovered and undertreated disease.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sameer ThakkerNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Jesse PersilyNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Paxton VoigtNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Jennifer BlakemoreDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Frederick LicciardiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Bobby B NajariDepartments of Urology and Population Health, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA. bobby.najari@nyulangone.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9548-9192
New York University · USNYU Langone Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo characterize the demographic differences between infertile/sub-fertile women who utilized infertility services vs. those that do not.

methodsA retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data obtained during the 2011-2013, 2013-2015, and 2015-2017 cycles of National Survey for Family Growth from interviews administered in home for randomly selected participants by a National Center of Health Statistics (NCHS) surveyor was used to analyze married, divorced, or women with long-term partners who reported difficulty having biological children (sub-fertile/infertile women). Demographic differences such as formal marital status, education, race, and religion were compared between women who presented for infertility care vs. those that did not. The primary outcome measure was presenting for infertility evaluation and subsequently utilizing infertility services. Healthcare utilization trends such as having a usual place of care and insurance status were also included as exposures of interest in the analysis.

resultsOf the 12,456 women included in the analysis 1770 (15.3%) had used infertility services and 1011 (8.3%) said it would be difficult for them to have a child but had not accessed infertility services. On univariate analysis, compared to women who used infertility services, untreated women had lower average household incomes (295.3 vs. 229.8% of the federal poverty line respectively). Untreated women also had lower levels of education and were more likely to be divorced or never have married. In terms of health status, unevaluated women were less likely to have a usual place for healthcare (87.3%) as compared to women presenting for fertility care (91.9%) (p = 0.004). When examining insurance status, 23.3% of unevaluated women were uninsured as compared to 8.3% of evaluated women. On multivariate analysis, infertile women without insurance were at 0.37 odds of utilizing infertility care compared to women with insurance.

conclusionsDemographic factors are associated with the utilization of infertility care. Insurance status is a significant predictor of whether or not infertile women will access treatment. Data from the three most recent NSFG surveys along with prior analyses demonstrate the need for expanded insurance coverage in order to address the socioeconomic disparities between infertile women who are accessing services vs. those that are not.

Indexed as

FamilyHealth Services AccessibilitySurveys and QuestionnairesAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInfertility, FemaleInterviews as TopicRetrospective StudiesUnited StatesARTDemographicsDisparityInfertilityInsurance statusNSFGSocioeconomic statusSub-fertilityUnevaluated

Identifiers

PMID33745082
PMCPMC8190414
OpenAlexW3139024212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.