ArticleThe patient2022
How Do People with Experience of Infertility Value Different Aspects of Assistive Reproductive Therapy? Results from a Multi-Country Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in The patient, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Driving factors in treatment decision-making of patients seeking medical assistance for infertility: a systematic review.Human reproduction update · 2024Pooled it
- Preferences of women experiencing infertility for in vitro fertilisation treatment in China: a discrete choice experiment.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the ENRICh scale for Chinese infertile patients: a methodological and cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Willingness to pay for assisted reproductive technologies among individuals with infertility in China.Health policy and planning · 2025Article
- An Overview of Data Collection in Health Preference Research.The patient · 2025Review
- What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability.The patient · 2025Review
- Assessment of patient preferences for assisted reproductive technology in China: a discrete choice experiment.BMJ open · 2025Article
- An Empirical Comparison of Discrete Choice Experiment and Best-Worst Scaling to Estimate Patient Preferences in Infertility Treatment in China.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Unmet Parenthood Goals, Health-Related Quality of Life and Apparent Irrationality: Understanding the Value of Treatments for Infertility.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAssistive reproductive therapies can help those who have difficulty conceiving but different forms of assistive reproductive therapies are associated with different treatment characteristics. We undertook a large, multinational discrete choice experiment to understand patient preferences for assistive reproductive therapies.
methodsWe administered an online discrete choice experiment with persons who had experience with subfertility or assistive reproductive therapies in the USA, UK, the Nordic region (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland), Spain, and China. Attributes encouraged trade-offs between effectiveness, risk of adverse effects, treatment (dis)comfort, (in)convenience, cost per cycle and shared decision making. We used multinomial logit and mixed-logit models to estimate preferences and attribute importance by country/region, and estimated willingness to pay for changes in attribute levels.
resultsA total of 7565 respondents participated. Mixed logit had a better fit than multinomial logit across all samples. Preferences moved in expected directions across all samples, but the relative importance of attributes differed between countries. Willingness to pay was greatest for improvements in effectiveness and a greater degree of shared decision making, and we observe a substantial 'option value' independent of treatment characteristics. Unexpectedly, preferences over cost were insignificant in the Chinese sample, limiting the use of willingness to pay in this sample.
conclusionsRespondents balanced concerns for effectiveness with other considerations, including the cost and (dis)comfort of treatment, and the degree of shared decision making, but there is also substantial option value independent of treatment characteristics, demonstrating value of assistive reproductive therapies to individuals with experience of subfertility. We hypothesise that price insensitivity in the Chinese sample may reflect a degree of social desirability bias.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.