SynthesisScientific reports2024
Feasibility analysis of China's medical insurance coverage of assisted reproductive technology.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence-driven precision treatment of reproductive medicine-related diseases: the optimal protocol choice for IVF-ET.Journal of advanced research · 2026Article
- Beijing's ART insurance coverage: enhancing outpatient visit frequency and reducing out-of-pocket costs.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Using network analysis to identify central symptoms of depression and anxiety in different profiles of infertility patients.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Perceptions of Health System Professionals on Integrating Fertility Care into Reproductive Health Policy in China.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- On demographic transformation: why we need to think beyond silos.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
- Reproductive toxicology of environmental endocrine-disrupting chemicals in women: a cohort study protocol.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are millions of patients experiencing infertility in China, but assisted reproductive technology (ART) is performed at the patient's expense and is difficult to afford. With the sharp decline in China's birth rate, there is a growing controversy over the inclusion of ART in medical insurance (MI). This study aims to explore the feasibility of ART coverage by MI for the first time. We obtained basic data such as the prevalence of infertility, the cost of ART, and the success rate in China with the method of meta-analysis and consulting the government bulletin. Then, we calculated the number of infertile couples in China and the total financial expenditure of MI covering ART. Finally, we discussed the feasibility of coverage, and analyzed the population growth and economic benefits after coverage. According to our research results, it was estimated that there were 4.102-11.792 million infertile couples in China, with an annual increase of 1.189-1.867 million. If MI covered ART, the fund would pay 72.313-207.878 billion yuan, accounting for 2-6% of the current fund balance, and the subsequent annual payment would be 20.961-32.913 billion yuan, accounting for 4-7% of the annual fund balance. This was assuming that all infertile couples would undergo ART, and the actual cost would be lower. The financial input‒output ratio would be 13.022. Benefiting from the inclusion of ART in MI coverage, there would be 3.348-9.624 million new live infants, and 8-13% newborns would be born every year thereafter, which means that by 2050, 37-65 million people would be born. Due to its affordable cost, high cost-effectiveness and favourable population growth, it may be feasible to include ART in MI.
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.