ArticleF&S reports2022
Public attitudes in the United States toward insurance coverage for in vitro fertilization and the provision of infertility services to lower income patients.
Article in F&S reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- What Do the General Public Know about Infertility and Its Treatment?European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2024Article
- Public opinions regarding infertility treatment insurance coverage among marginalized patient populations.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Impact of in vitro fertilization state mandates for third party insurance coverage in the United States: a review and critical assessment.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2022Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess attitudes and factors that influence public opinion in the general US population toward insurance coverage and provision of infertility care to lower income patients. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: Online. Patients: A nationally representative sample of US residents. Interventions: Questionnaire with multiple choice and open response questions. Main Outcome Measures: Public attitudes toward in vitro fertilization and infertility care coverage for lower income patients. Results: A total of 1,027 (90.2%) participants completed the survey, among whom 620 (60.4%) had private insurance, 275 (26.8%) had Medicare/Medicaid, and 56 (5.5%) were uninsured. The majority (916, 89.2%) did not consider infertility a disease. Over half of the respondents (568, 55.3%) supported private insurance coverage of infertility services, including for in vitro fertilization. Most respondents, 735 (71.6%) believed that the prevalence and psychosocial impact of infertility were equal among the lower and higher income people. The majority of respondents with an opinion (512, 67.6%) believed that doctors should provide infertility treatments regardless of the income level of the patients. Of supporters, 40.1% believed in the right to have a family regardless of income, and 38.2% believed that doctors had a social responsibility to provide infertility services. After adjusting for covariates, age <45 years, noncollege graduates, desiring more children, believing that infertility was a disease, and residence in the Northeast region remained significant predictors for support of private insurance coverage. Conclusions: Public perception of infertility as a disease is one of the strongest predictors of support for insurance coverage for infertility services, underscoring the need for enhanced advocacy and education in the general public.
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.