ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2026
Impact of state insurance mandates on in vitro fertilization utilization among patients with recurrent pregnancy loss.
Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate if state in vitro fertilization (IVF) insurance mandates with language inclusive of patients with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) were associated with increased utilization of IVF for this indication in 2021. MATERIALS AND
methodsState IVF mandate data from 2021 were collected from RESOLVE.org and verified using state government websites. Two clinicians independently assessed mandate language for inclusion of patients with RPL. IVF cycle data from 2021 were obtained from the Center for Disease Control's Assisted Reproductive Technology Report. A chi-squared test compared IVF cycles performed for RPL in states with IVF mandates inclusive of RPL, mandates exclusive of RPL, and no mandate.
resultsAs of January 2021, 12 states had IVF mandates, six (50.0%) of which included RPL as an indication. The proportion of IVF cycles for RPL was higher in states with mandates inclusive of RPL (6,303/72,327 cycles, 8.7%) compared to those with mandates exclusive of RPL (5,288/92,648 cycles, 5.7%; p < 0.001) and states without a mandate (14,677/248,801 cycles, 5.9%; p < 0.001). The proportion of cycles for RPL was significantly lower in states with exclusive mandates compared to those without any mandate (p = 0.035).
conclusionsStates with IVF mandates inclusive of RPL performed 53% more cycles for this indication than those with exclusive mandates or no mandate. Though RPL is not currently an accepted indication for IVF, future research may demonstrate utility of IVF for specific subgroups of patients with RPL, such as those with balanced translocations. Mandates should maintain inclusivity in defining who is eligible for fertility coverage so as not to exclude patients from accessing care as reproductive medicine advances.
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.