ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2026
Potential increase of the U.S. total fertility rate resulting from restorative treatment of unresolved subfertility: a simulation study.
Article in Frontiers in reproductive 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The total fertility rate (TFR) in most developed countries has been declining for decades. In the United States (U.S.), the total fertility rate has remained below replacement level since 2007. Subfertility affects at least 15% of women or couples over their reproductive lifespan and contributes to reduced TFR. Restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) is a medically based approach to subfertility care that can be delivered in primary care settings to increase live birth rates. Objective: To estimate the theoretical impact of use of RRM among subfertile couples in the United States. Methods: We conducted a simulation study. Model inputs included the number of women of reproductive age in the United States by 5-year age groups; current age-specific and total fertility rates; the proportion of women in each age group with subfertility; estimated spontaneous live birth rates among women with subfertility; and age-specific crude live birth rates with RRM treatment. We evaluated fifteen scenarios including sensitivity analyses: two different varying assumptions for live births from spontaneous conception (25% vs. 50%), two levels of RRM utilization among subfertile women (20% vs. 50%), three different estimates of the number of subfertile women who would be potentially eligible for RRM treatment, and 4 different levels of effectiveness (live birth) from RRM treatment. Results: The baseline TFR in the United States was 1.77 during 2015-2019, and 13.5% of women ages 20-44 were estimated to have subfertility. In a conservative scenario (50% spontaneous births; 20% RRM utilization; married women trying to conceive for at least 12 months, 20.7% RRM live births), the TFR increased to 1.79, representing a 1.0% relative increase (absolute +0.02). In an optimistic scenario (25% spontaneous births; 50% RRM utilization; all subfertile women), the TFR increased to 2.02, a 14.5% relative increase (absolute +0.26), approaching replacement-level fertility. Conclusion: Simulation results suggest that expanding access to RRM within primary care settings could meaningfully increase the U.S. TFR, by reducing unresolved subfertility. Realizing this potential would require policy and health system changes to address workforce capacity, insurance coverage, and equitable access. These findings underscore the potential contribution of non-IVF fertility care pathways in addressing population-level fertility decline.
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.