ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2026
Out of pocket expenditure incurred by couples seeking infertility services at tertiary level facilities in India.
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives Diagnosis and treatment of infertility, mostly sought at tertiary facilities, contribute to substantial out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE). This study estimated OOPE among couples seeking care for endometriosis, male infertility, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), tubal factor, and uterine factor, including costs of diagnosis, management, and intrauterine insemination (IUI). Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted across five tertiary healthcare facilities (three public, two private) selected through convenience sampling to represent different regions. Based on mean (SD) OOPE INR (₹)144,393 (₹130,943), effect size 0.16, α=0.05, and 80% power, the sample was equally distributed across sites and IVF/non-IVF groups, with ∼100 participants per site. Couples were interviewed between April 2022-March 2023. Catastrophic health expenditure was defined as infertility spending exceeding 40% of annual household non-food expenditure. OOPE over the preceding year covered direct medical, non-medical, and indirect costs. Results Annual median OOPE was ₹11,317 (US $136.5) (IQR: ₹4,801-₹19,513) US $, higher in private facilities ₹14,217 ($171.4) (IQR: ₹8,030-₹21,848) than public facilities ₹8,355 ($100.7) (IQR: ₹3,785-₹17,386). Direct medical costs were the major contributor: median ₹5,802 ($69.9) (IQR: ₹2,186-₹11,847) Highest OOPE was for endometriosis ₹15,084 ($181.9) (IQR: ₹8,114-₹20,758), followed by uterine factor and male infertility ₹13,211 ($159.3) (IQR: ₹6,654-₹21,521). OOPE increased with absence of insurance (₹6,919; $83.4), comorbidities (₹2,593; $31.3), IUI (₹2,668; $32.1), and PCOS (₹2,004; $24.1). Catastrophic Health Expenditure was associated with comorbidities (OR=1.61), IUI (OR=1.88), and lower per capita income <₹59,400 ($715.7) (OR=3.44). Overall, 59.4% experienced CHE. Interpretation and conclusions Infertility care imposes substantial out of pocket expenditure in India. Strengthened insurance coverage and public sector investment are critical for equitable access.
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.