Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023
Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy for women with subfertility in China: an economic evaluation using evidence from the CESE-PGS trial.
Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Elective single embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles with or without preimplantation genetic testing using next-generation sequencing: A randomized clinical trial.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Improving access to fertility treatment in Asia Pacific: consensus from an expert forum.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Review
- In vitro fertilization as an option for couples with genetic disorders.Clinical and experimental reproductive medicine · 2025Article
- Optimal embryo management strategies for patients undergoing antagonist protocols in IVF treatment.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Assessment of patient preferences for assisted reproductive technology in China: a discrete choice experiment.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Financial cost of assisted reproductive technology for patients in high-income countries: A systematic review protocol.PloS one · 2025Article
- Sociocultural imperatives for Singapore to permit preimplantation genetic testing-aneuploidy (PGT-A) despite uncertain results and ongoing controversy.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Novel embryo selection strategies-finding the right balance.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2023Article
- Morphokinetic Markers of Blastocyst Formation and Chromosomal Euploidy in Embryos Derived From In Vitro Maturation Oocytes.Reproductive medicine and biologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere are a large number of infertile couples in China, but its treatment is notoriously expensive and not currently covered by insurance. The utility of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy as an adjunct to in vitro fertilization has been debated.
objectiveTo investigate the cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) versus conventional technology in in vitro fertilization (IVF) from the perspective of the healthcare system in China.
methodsFollowing the exact steps in the IVF protocol, a decision tree model was developed, based on the data from the CESE-PGS trial and using cost scenarios for IVF in China. The scenarios were compared for costs per patient and cost-effectiveness. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to confirm the robustness of the findings.
main outcome measuresCosts per live birth, Costs per patient, Incremental cost-effectiveness for miscarriage prevention.
resultsThe average costs per live birth of PGT-A were estimated as ¥39230.71, which is about 16.8% higher than that of the conventional treatment. Threshold analysis revealed that PGT-A would need to increase the pregnancy rate of 26.24-98.24% or a cost reduction of ¥4649.29 to ¥1350.71 to achieve the same cost-effectiveness. The incremental costs per prevented miscarriage was approximately ¥45600.23. The incremental cost-effectiveness for miscarriage prevention showed that the willingness to pay would be ¥43422.60 for PGT-A to be cost-effective.
conclusionThe present cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrates that embryo selection with PGT‑A is not suitable for routine applications from the perspective of healthcare providers in China, given the cumulative live birth rate and the high costs of PGT‑A.
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.