ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2022
Geographic distribution of assisted reproductive technology clinics in the USA: a multilevel sociodemographic analysis.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Institutional barriers to assisted reproductive technology access in rural South Africa: a qualitative study of medical officers' perspectives.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- How far is the clinic? Urbanicity and sociodemographic variation in the distance to assisted reproductive technology clinics in the USA.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Mediators affecting the higher risk of stillbirth among foreign-born women in Sweden: A nationwide cohort study.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Patient perspectives of telehealth for fertility care: a national survey.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate whether sociodemographic characteristics of US Census tracts and counties and state-level infertility insurance policy are associated with the presence of assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinics.
methodsMultilevel logistic regression analyses using publicly available reports of ART clinic locations (2014-2018) matched with sociodemographic data from the US Census Bureau and state infertility insurance policy information.
resultsAt the tract-level, multivariate multilevel logistic regression found significant associations with the likelihood of an ART clinic in a tract and the size of the tract population (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.063, SE = 0.018, p < .001), the tract median household income (aOR = 0.990, SE = 0.002, p < 0.001), and the percentages of the population who were Hispanic (aOR = 0.975, SE = 0.007, p < 0.001), women over 25 with a bachelor's degree or higher (aOR: 1.052, SE = 0.004, p < 0.001), and foreign-born (aOR: 1.037, SE = 0.009, p < .001). At the county-level, significant associations were found with the county median household income (aOR: 1.016, SE = 0.006, p < .01) and the percentage of the population that identified as Black (aOR = 1.013, SE = 0.006, p < .05) and Hispanic (aOR = 1.028, SE = 0.009, p < .05). Multivariate models showed no associations between tract clinic counts and state infertility policy.
conclusionThere is mixed evidence that clinic concentration is associated with expected sociodemographics. In particular, physical proximity may not principally drive racial disparities in ART access. Furthermore, insurance mandates are not associated with the presence of an ART clinics in a tract, suggesting alternative policy levers may be needed to address differential access and utilization of ART services.
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.