Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Sep;4(3):292-299.
doi: 10.1016/j.xfre.2023.05.008.

Parental sociodemographics of medically assisted reproduction births in the United States: a dyadic population-level study

Affiliations

Parental sociodemographics of medically assisted reproduction births in the United States: a dyadic population-level study

Ester Lazzari et al. F S Rep. 2023 Sep.

Abstract

Objective: To study how men's and couples' sociodemographic characteristics predict the probability of having a birth conceived using medically assisted reproduction (MAR) in the United States.

Design: Population-based study.

Setting: Not applicable.

Patients: Men and women in the National Vital Statistics Birth certificate data from 2009 to 2019.

Intervention: None.

Main outcome measures: Proportion of MAR births out of total births by parental sociodemographic categories and probability of having a MAR birth.

Results: Between 2009 and 2019, the overall prevalence of MAR births among men was 1.81%. Fathers of children conceived using MAR tended to be older, higher educated, and white compared with fathers of naturally conceived children. During the period of 2009-2019, these sociodemographic profiles remained largely unchanged. Controlling for maternal age and birth order only partially reduced disparities by education and race. In 2019, highly educated fathers were 2.04 percentage points (95% confidence interval, 1.97-2.12) more likely to have a MAR-conceived birth than fathers with a low educational level, and black fathers were associated with a reduction in the probability of having an MAR-conceived child by - 1.07 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -1.11 to -1.04) compared with white fathers. The dyadic analysis using parents' education and race interactions revealed that partnering with someone of a higher educational level increases the likelihood of having a MAR birth, beyond what would be observed by considering only individual-level characteristics.

Conclusions: To comprehend the environment in which MAR-conceived children are born and raised, performing dyadic analyses that examine the characteristics of both partners is essential. The findings underscore the enduring presence of substantial social disparities in MAR use in the United States, with MAR-conceived children raised in environments of relative advantage, which may impact their future health and development.

Keywords: Reproductive technologies; United States; parental characteristics; population-based studies; social disparities.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests: E.L. reports funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement No. 101001410). K.T. has nothing to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Distribution of medically assisted reproduction (MAR)–conceived and non–MAR-conceived births by paternal sociodemographic characteristics, 2009–2019, United States. Source: Investigators’ calculations on the basis of the National Vital Statistics System. NH = non-Hispanic.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Proportion of medically assisted reproduction out of total births by parental racial and educational pairings, 2009–2019, United States. Source: Investigators’ calculations on the basis of the National Vital Statistics System. NH = non-Hispanic.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Percentage point change in the probability of a medically assisted reproduction (MAR)–conceived birth (with 95% confidence interval), by parental educational pairings (2019 births). Interaction only for the year 2019. All interactions were statistically significant (P< .01). Source: Investigators’ calculations on the basis of the National Vital Statistics System.

Similar articles

References

    1. Zegers-Hochschild F., Adamson G.D., Dyer S., Racowsky C., De Mouzon J., Sokol R., et al. The international glossary on infertility and fertility care, 2017. Hum Rep. 2017;32:1786–1801. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stephen E.H., Chandra A., King R.B. Supply of and demand for assisted reproductive technologies in the United States: clinic- and population-based data, 1995-2010. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:451–458. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sunderam S., Zhang Y., Jewett A., Kissin D.M. State-specific assisted reproductive technology surveillance, United States: 2019 data brief. https://www.cdc.gov/art/state-specific-surveillance/2019/pdf/state-speci... Available at: Accessed December, 2022. - PMC - PubMed
    1. De Geyter C., Wyns C., Calhaz-Jorge C., Mouzon J de, Ferraretti A.P., Kupka M., et al. 20 years of the European IVF-Monitoring Consortium registry: what have we learned? A comparison with registries from two other regions. Hum Rep. 2020;35:2832–2849. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leridon H., Slama R. The impact of a decline in fecundity and of pregnancy postponement on final number of children and demand for assisted reproduction technology. Hum Rep. 2008;23:1312–1319. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources