Fertility and sterility · 2024
Using national in vitro fertilization registries to validate clinical outcomes after in vitro fertilization covered by health insurance.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Suh David, Yan Phyllis, Dunn Rodney L, Norton Edward C, Dalton Vanessa K, Marsh Erica E, Weiss Marissa S, Dupree James M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles covered by health insurance using a national commercial claims database and validate key clinical events against national IVF registries.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SUBJECTS: US women aged 20-44 years who underwent IVF from 2005-2020 in Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (CDM).
EXPOSURE: Undergoing IVF.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In vitro fertilization cycles and rates of pregnancies (inclusive of losses and terminations), live births, and live birth types (e.g., singleton, twin, and triplet or higher-order).
RESULTS: We identified more than 3,000 IVF cycles in each year from 2005-2020 within CDM. When comparing our rates of clinical outcomes with external benchmark data, the results were similar across all the years of our study. For example, in 2020, the percentages of pregnancies after first embryo transfer were 62.03% (95% confidence interval [CI], 59.48-64.47) in CDM and 64.96% in data from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART). The rates of live birth after first embryo transfer were 44.58% (95% CI, 41.90-47.21) in CDM in 2020 and 46.95% in SART in 2020. The rate of singleton births was 94.17% (95% CI, 92.24-96.10) in CDM in 2020, and this rate was 94.37% in SART in 2020. For twin births, the rates were 5.48% (95% CI, 3.60-7.35) in CDM in 2020 and 5.46% in SART in 2020. The rates of triplet or higher-order births were 0.35% (95% CI, 0.00-0.84) in CDM in 2020 and 0.17% in SART in 2020.
CONCLUSION: We found that CDM can be used to accurately identify IVF cycles covered by insurance and key clinical outcomes such as rates of pregnancies, live births, and live birth types, and our reported rates were similar to national IVF clinical registry data. Our findings support that CDM is a robust data source to conduct research about IVF insurance coverage and can accurately evaluate clinical outcomes resulting from IVF. Policymakers who are considering insurance coverage for IVF can use CDM to model and measure the impact of new or existing policies for IVF insurance coverage.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SUBJECTS: US women aged 20-44 years who underwent IVF from 2005-2020 in Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (CDM).
EXPOSURE: Undergoing IVF.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In vitro fertilization cycles and rates of pregnancies (inclusive of losses and terminations), live births, and live birth types (e.g., singleton, twin, and triplet or higher-order).
RESULTS: We identified more than 3,000 IVF cycles in each year from 2005-2020 within CDM. When comparing our rates of clinical outcomes with external benchmark data, the results were similar across all the years of our study. For example, in 2020, the percentages of pregnancies after first embryo transfer were 62.03% (95% confidence interval [CI], 59.48-64.47) in CDM and 64.96% in data from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART). The rates of live birth after first embryo transfer were 44.58% (95% CI, 41.90-47.21) in CDM in 2020 and 46.95% in SART in 2020. The rate of singleton births was 94.17% (95% CI, 92.24-96.10) in CDM in 2020, and this rate was 94.37% in SART in 2020. For twin births, the rates were 5.48% (95% CI, 3.60-7.35) in CDM in 2020 and 5.46% in SART in 2020. The rates of triplet or higher-order births were 0.35% (95% CI, 0.00-0.84) in CDM in 2020 and 0.17% in SART in 2020.
CONCLUSION: We found that CDM can be used to accurately identify IVF cycles covered by insurance and key clinical outcomes such as rates of pregnancies, live births, and live birth types, and our reported rates were similar to national IVF clinical registry data. Our findings support that CDM is a robust data source to conduct research about IVF insurance coverage and can accurately evaluate clinical outcomes resulting from IVF. Policymakers who are considering insurance coverage for IVF can use CDM to model and measure the impact of new or existing policies for IVF insurance coverage.