ArticleBMJ public health2026
Preferences of women experiencing infertility for in vitro fertilisation treatment in China: a discrete choice experiment.
Article in BMJ public health, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is a key treatment for infertility, but uptake and continuation may be limited by treatment burden, side effects and out-of-pocket costs. Evidence on IVF treatment preferences among women in China remains limited. This study examined the preferences of Chinese women experiencing infertility for different IVF treatment attributes. Methods: A discrete choice experiment was conducted using face-to-face surveys to elicit preferences among women experiencing infertility receiving IVF treatment. Five attributes were examined: number of visits per cycle, side effects, treatment costs per cycle, information disclosure about IVF and pregnancy rate per cycle. Preference weights were estimated using the mixed logit model. Willingness to pay and relative importance of the attributes were estimated. Scenario and heterogeneity analyses were performed. Results: 591 participants were included in the final analysis. All five attributes significantly influenced preferences. Pregnancy rate per cycle was the most important attribute, followed by side effects, treatment costs, information disclosure and number of visits. Increasing the pregnancy rate from 15% to 60% per cycle produced the largest utility gain. Participants were willing to pay ¥56 099.89 for this improvement, ¥22 718.73 to reduce side effects from serious to mild, ¥8720.87 for always receiving information versus none and ¥6429.00 to reduce visits from 30 to 10 per cycle. Preference heterogeneity was associated with education and household income. Conclusions: Chinese women undergoing infertility treatment place the greatest value on higher IVF pregnancy rates, fewer side effects and lower treatment costs. Patient-centred counselling, burden-reduction strategies and policies that reduce financial barriers, including potential insurance coverage, may improve IVF acceptability, continuation and utilisation. Tailored approaches are needed to address preference heterogeneity across patient subgroups.
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.