IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v45y2025i8p1034-1051.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weighing Parenthood Wishes: A Conjoint Analysis of Criteria to Prioritize Infertile Couples for Publicly Funded Fertility Treatment

Author

Listed:
  • Astrid Van Muylder

    (Leuven Unit for Health Technology Assessment Research (LUHTAR), Department Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium)

  • Roselinde Kessels

    (Department of Data Analytics and Digitalization, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
    Department of Economics, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium)

  • Thomas D’Hooghe

    (Guest Professor, Research Group Reproductive Medicine, Department of Development and Regeneration, Organ Systems, Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven (University of Leuven), Belgium
    Adjunct Professor, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
    Vice-President and Head, Global Medical Affairs Fertility, Research and Development, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany)

  • Jeroen Luyten

    (Leuven Unit for Health Technology Assessment Research (LUHTAR), Department Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium)

Abstract

Background Parenthood is a key life goal for many, but infertility affects about 1 in 6 globally. While fertility treatments offer solutions, their high costs limit access. Many health systems provide public funding, yet budget constraints prevent fully funded access, often leaving patients with significant out-of-pocket costs. Policy makers face the challenge of prioritizing individuals for publicly funded treatments, but how to do this remains unclear and underresearched. Worldwide, funding policies vary widely, often adopting controversial access criteria. Methods We investigated Belgian population preferences for prioritizing in vitro fertilization (IVF) funding through a discrete-choice experiment with a representative sample of 3,000 Belgians. Attributes included maternal and partner age, infertility cause, civil status, prior biological children, and treatment cost. Using a Bayesian D-optimal design and panel mixed logit model, we assessed criteria relevance. The resulting multiattribute utility function created a priority ranking of couples, which we compared to the ranking under the current Belgian policy, which focuses only on maternal age (

Suggested Citation

  • Astrid Van Muylder & Roselinde Kessels & Thomas D’Hooghe & Jeroen Luyten, 2025. "Weighing Parenthood Wishes: A Conjoint Analysis of Criteria to Prioritize Infertile Couples for Publicly Funded Fertility Treatment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 45(8), pages 1034-1051, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:45:y:2025:i:8:p:1034-1051
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X251353524
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X251353524
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X251353524?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:45:y:2025:i:8:p:1034-1051. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.