ArticleWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
Differences in Use of Fertility Treatment Between People With Medicaid and Private Health Insurance Coverage in the United States.
Article in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cumulative adverse social determinants of health, prolonged unsuccessful conception, and infertility-related healthcare contact among U.S. women: NHANES 2013-2016.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Fertility care for all: impact of New York State's Medicaid expansion on infertility care.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe aimed to compare differences in receipt of any and specific types of fertility services between people with Medicaid and private insurance.
methodsWe used National Survey of Family Growth (2002-2019) data and linear probability regression models to examine the association between insurance type (Medicaid or private) and fertility service use. The primary outcome was use of fertility services in the past 12 months, and secondary outcomes were use of specific types of fertility services at any time: 1) testing, 2) common medical treatment, and 3) use of any fertility treatment type (testing, medical treatment, or surgical treatment of infertility). We additionally calculated time-to-pregnancy using a method that estimates the unobserved total amount of time the respondent spent trying to become pregnant using their current duration of pregnancy attempt at the time of the survey. We calculated time-to-pregnancy ratios across respondent characteristics to examine if insurance type was associated with differential time-to-pregnancy.
resultsIn adjusted models, Medicaid coverage was associated with an 11.2-percentage point (95% confidence interval: -22.3 to -0.0) lower use of fertility services in the past 12 months compared with private coverage. Relative to private coverage, Medicaid insurance was also associated with large and statistically significantly lower rates of ever having used infertility testing or any fertility services. Insurance type was not associated with differences in time-to-pregnancy.
conclusionsPeople covered by Medicaid were less likely to have used fertility services compared with people with private insurance. Differences in coverage of fertility services between Medicaid and private payers may represent a barrier to fertility treatment for Medicaid recipients.
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.