ArticleHuman reproduction open2026
The declining efficiency of IVF in the USA.
Article in Human reproduction open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- One Embryology: impactful connections between human- and wildlife-assisted reproduction.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Review
- Ultra-low oxygen tension duringbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Don't panic: IVF efficiency in the USA remains strong.Human reproduction open · 2026Article
- Don't panic? Or don't conflate?Human reproduction open · 2026Article
- Improving governance of IVF and oncofertility practice in the USA: a call to action.Human reproduction open · 2026Article
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
study questionHas the efficiency of IVF cycles in the USA declined between 2012 and 2021? SUMMARY ANSWER: National U.S. data show a continuous linear decline in IVF cycle efficiency between 2012 and 2021. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous studies reported that live birth rates after IVF increased until 2010 but subsequently declined, potentially due to the introduction of IVF 'add-ons' and changes in clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: Retrospective cohort study, using publicly available national U.S. IVF outcome data reported annually to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for the period 2012-2021. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING
methodsCDC annual reports were used as a data source. Extracted variables included a number of IVF cycle starts, embryo transfers, embryo banking cycles, and live births. IVF 'treatment efficiency' was calculated as the proportion of live births per initiated cycle (intent-to-treat analysis). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Over the study period, IVF cycle starts increased by 234.7% (176 274 to 413 776), embryo transfers by 150.3% (134 471 to 202 121), and embryo banking cycles by 902.3% (18 585 to 167 689). Live births increased by 179.2% (51 286 to 91 906). However, cycle efficiency declined from 29.1% in 2012 to 22.2% in 2021, a relative reduction of 23.4%, with an approximately linear decline across the decade. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study is based on aggregate CDC data without patient-level granularity. Therefore, analyses could not control for confounding factors such as parity, infertility diagnosis, or detailed age subgroups. Embryo banking practices also complicate year-to-year comparisons of live birth rates. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
findingsThese findings suggest that despite substantial growth in IVF cycle numbers, treatment efficiency has progressively declined in the USA over the last decade. This decline coincided with a rapid increase in the use of embryo banking and other IVF 'add-ons'. The results raise concern about current clinical practices and highlight the need for critical re-evaluation of routine interventions in IVF. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: No external funding was received for this study. NG and DHB hold patents related to androgen treatment in females (DHEA) with numbers US8067400B2, US8501718B2, and US9375436B2 (listed in USPTO/public records and assigned to American Infertility of New York). They also receive royalties from Nutraceuticals LLC, which has helped commercialize DHEA as a nutritional supplement. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/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.