This study aims to enhance the understanding of how the increasing use of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) has contributed to the increase in the total fertility rate (TFR) and to further delaying childbearing. Moreover, it addresses the gap in the methodology concerning the quantification of the effect of ART on fertility postponement. Czechia is one of few countries that are able to serve for the study of the demographic impacts of ART. ART and non-ART fertility rates were calculated using unique data on all children born in Czechia. Excluding mothers who received cross-border reproductive care, the proportion of ART live births in Czechia has not exceeded 4%. However, without ART the TFR would have stood at just 1.65 instead of 1.71 in 2020. ART significantly contributed to a reduction in childlessness and to the increase in fertility rates at ages over 35. Applying the decomposition method, the contribution of the use of ART to delaying childbearing between 2013 and 2020 was 4%. The findings have important policy implications. ART has the potential to support fertility recovery in the context of delayed childbearing. The findings served to alleviate concerns about the contribution of ART to the further undesired delay of childbearing.

Department of Demography and Geodemography Faculty of Science Charles University Prague Czechia

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Kocourková J, Slabá J, Šťastná A. The role of cohorts in the understanding of the changes in fertility in Czechia since 1990. AUC Geogr. 2022;57(1):61–74. doi: 10.14712/23361980.2022.6. DOI

Vienna Institute of Demography. European Demographic Datasheet 2022. Wittgenstein Centre. https://www.populationeurope.org (IIASA, VID/OEAW, University of Vienna, 2022).

Wyns C, et al. ART in Europe, 2018: Results generated from European registries by ESHRE. Hum. Reprod. Open. 2022;3:1–20. PubMed PMC

Andersen AN, et al. Assisted reproductive technology and intrauterine inseminations in Europe, 2005: Results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum. Reprod. 2009;24:1267–1287. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep035. PubMed DOI

Kocourková J, Fait T. Can increased use of ART retrieve the Czech Republic from the low fertility trap? Neuro Endocrinol. Lett. 2009;30:739–748. PubMed

Yu H, et al. Association of adverse birth outcomes with in vitro fertilization after controlling infertility factors based on a singleton live birth cohort. Sci. Rep. 2022;12:4528. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-08707-x. PubMed DOI PMC

Finnstrom O, et al. Maternal and child outcome after in vitro fertilization: A review of 25 years of population-based data from Sweden. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2011;90:494–500. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01088.x. PubMed DOI

McDonald SD, et al. Preterm birth and low birth weight among in vitro fertilization singletons: A systematic review and meta-analyses. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2009;146:138–148. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2009.05.035. PubMed DOI

Lazzari E, Gray E, Chambers GM. The contribution of assisted reproductive technology to fertility rates and parity transition: An analysis of Australian data. Demogr. Res. 2021;45:1081–1096. doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2021.45.35. DOI

Raymer J, Guan Q, Norman RJ, Ledger W, Chambers GM. Projecting future utilization of medically assisted fertility treatments. Popul. Stud. (Camb.) 2020;74:23–38. doi: 10.1080/00324728.2019.1676461. PubMed DOI

Leridon H. Effets biologiques du retard à la première maternité et du recours à l’aide médicale à la procréation sur la descendance finale. Population. 2017;72:463–490. doi: 10.3917/popu.1703.0463. DOI

Grant, J. C., Hoorens, S., Gallo, F. & Cave, J. A. K. Should ART be Part of a Population Mix? A Preliminary Assessment of the Demographic and Economic Impact of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/documented_briefings/2006/RAND_DB507.pdf. (The RAND Corporation, 2006)

Sunde A. Europe’s declining population and the contribution of ART. Pharm. Policy Law. 2007;9:79–90.

Ziebe S, Devroey P, On behalf of the State of the ART 2007 Workshop Group Assisted reproductive technologies are an integrated part of national strategies addressing demographic and reproductive challenges. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2008;14:583–592. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmn038. PubMed DOI

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. Reprod. 2008;23:1312–1319. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den106. PubMed DOI

Präg, P. et al.Childlessness and Assisted Reproduction in Europe. Preprint https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/sxgu4/ (2017).

Habbema JDF, et al. The effect of in vitro fertilization on birth rates in western countries. Hum. Reprod. 2009;24:1414–1419. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep004. PubMed DOI

Sobotka T, et al. The contribution of assisted reproduction to completed fertility: An analysis of Danish data. Popul. Dev. Rev. 2008;34:79–101. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2008.00206.x. DOI

Hoorens S, Gallo F, Cave J, Grant JC. Can assisted reproductive technologies help to offset population ageing? An assessment of the demographic and economic impact of ART in Denmark and UK. Hum. Reprod. 2007;22:2471–2475. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dem181. PubMed DOI

Kocourková J, Burcin B, Kučera T. Demographic relevancy of increased use of assisted reproduction in European countries. Reprod. Health. 2014;11:1–10. doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-11-37. PubMed DOI PMC

Kocourková J, Konečná H, Burcin B, Kučera T. How old is too old? A contribution to the discussion on age limits for assisted reproduction technique access. Their Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2015;30:482–492. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2015.01.017. PubMed DOI

Goisis A, Håberg SE, Hanevik HI, Magnus MCh, Kravdal Ø. The demographics of assisted reproductive technology births in a Nordic country. Hum. Reprod. 2020;35:1441–1450. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaa055. PubMed DOI PMC

Tierney K. The future of assisted reproductive technology live births in the United States. Popul. Res. Policy Rev. 2022;41:2289–2309. doi: 10.1007/s11113-022-09731-5. PubMed DOI PMC

Kocourková J, Šťastná A. The realization of fertility intentions in the context of childbearing postponement: Comparison of transitional and post-transitional populations. J. Biosoc. Sci. 2021;53:82–97. doi: 10.1017/S002193202000005X. PubMed DOI

Šťastná A, Kocourková J, Šprocha B. Parental leave policies and second births: A comparison of Czechia and Slovakia. Popul. Res. Policy Rev. 2020;39:415–437. doi: 10.1007/s11113-019-09546-x. DOI

Volejníková A, Kocourková J. Asistovaná reprodukce v Česku z pohledu přeshraniční reprodukční péče [Assisted reproduction in Czechia from the perspective of cross-border reproductive care] Demografie. 2022;64:159–174. doi: 10.54694/dem.0299. DOI

Kocourková J, Burcin B. Demographic aspects of assisted reproduction in the Czech Republic. Demografie. 2012;54:250–263.

De Geyter Ch, et al. ART in Europe, 2014: Results generated from European registries by ASHRE. Hum. Reprod. 2018;33:1586–1601. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dey242. PubMed DOI

Osmanagaoglu K, et al. Spontaneous pregnancies in couples who discontinued intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment: A 5-year follow-up study. Fertil. Steril. 2002;78:550–556. doi: 10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03300-9. PubMed DOI

Troude P, Bailly E, Guibert J, Bouyer J, de la Rochebrochard E. Spontaneous pregnancies among couples previously treated by in vitro fertilization. Fertil. Steril. 2012;98:63–68. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.03.058. PubMed DOI

Kitagawa EM. Components of a difference between two rates. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1955;50:1168–1194.

Sivková O, Hulíková Tesárková K. Dekompozice změn průměrného věku matky při narození dítěte v České republic od roku 1950 [Decomposition of the mean age of mothers at childbirth in the Czech Republic since the year 1950] Demografie. 2012;54:264–279.

Šimpach, O. & Šimpachová Pechrová, M. Determinants influencing total fertility rate in the Czech Republic. in 12th International Days of Statistics and Economics. 1727–1735. https://msed.vse.cz/msed_2018/article/43-Simpach-Ondrej-paper.pdf (2018)|

ESHRE Capri Workshop Group Fertility and ageing. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2005;11:261–276. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmi006. PubMed DOI

Hašková H, Sloboda Z. Negotiating access to assisted reproduction technologies in a post-socialist heteronormative context. J. Int. Women's Stud. 2018;20:53–67.

Kocourková J, Šťastná A, Černíková A. The impact of economic crisis on fertility levels in EU member states. Polit. Ekon. 2019;67:82–104. doi: 10.18267/j.polek.1230. DOI

Lazzari E, Potančoková M, Sobotka T, Gray E, Chambers GM. Projecting the contribution of assisted reproductive technology to completed cohort fertility. Popul. Res. Policy Rev. 2023;42(1):6. doi: 10.1007/s11113-023-09765-3. PubMed DOI PMC

Wang Y, Gozgor G, Lau CKM. Effects of pandemics uncertainty on fertility. Front. Public Health. 2022;10:854771. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.854771. PubMed DOI PMC

Trueblood JS, Sussman AB, O’Leary D, Holmes WR. Financial constraint and perceptions of COVID-19. Sci. Rep. 2023;13:3432. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-30118-9. PubMed DOI PMC

Szalma I, Djundeva M. What shapes public attitudes towards assisted reproduction technologies in Europe? Demográfia. 2019;62:45–75.

Choi SKY, Venetis C, Ledger W, Havard A, Harris K, Norman RJ, Jorm LR, Chambers GM. Population-wide contribution of medically assisted reproductive technologies to overall births in Australia: Temporal trends and parental characteristics. Hum. Reprod. 2022;37(5):1047–1058. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deac032. PubMed DOI

Hellstrand J, Nisén J, Miranda V, Fallesen P, Dommermuth L, Myrskylä M. Not just later, but fewer: Novel trends in cohort fertility in the Nordic countries. Demography. 2021;58(4):1373–1399. doi: 10.1215/00703370-9373618. PubMed DOI

The association between preterm births and assisted reproductive technologies