Skip to Main Content
Boston University
  • Bostonia
  • BU Today
  • The Brink
  • University Publications

    • Bostonia
    • BU Today
    • The Brink
  • School & College Publications

    • The Record
Other Publications
The Brink
  • Sections
Pioneering Research from Boston University

Birth Outcomes and Assisted Reproductive Technology

Subertility may account for some elevated risks attributed to in vitro fertilization and other ART procedures

March 16, 2015
  • Lisa Chedekel
Twitter Facebook
Lead author Eugene Declercq, an SPH professor, says the study is an important first step in “extricating the possible risks of ART from underlying infertility or maternal demographic and health risks.”

Birth outcomes for babies whose mothers used assisted reproductive technology (ART) are better in some cases, and worse in others, than for subfertile women who did not use ART, according to a first-of-its-kind study led by Boston University School of Public Health (SPH) researchers.

Those findings, published online in the journal Fertility and Sterility, suggest that underlying subfertility, distinct from the use of ART, may account for some of the elevated risks in birth outcomes attributed to the use of in vitro fertilization and other ART procedures.

SPH researchers on the study included Eugene Declercq, professor of community health sciences and the study’s lead author; Candice Belanoff, clinical assistant professor of community health sciences; and Howard Cabral, professor of biostatistics.

They found that the risks of preterm birth and low birth weight were higher for singletons (single babies) born to mothers who had ART than for those who had fertility problems but did not use ART. But the risks of perinatal death—stillbirths or deaths within one week of birth—were no higher for mothers with ART than for fertile women, while they were significantly higher for singletons born to subfertile mothers. And for twins, the risks of death among ART births were significantly lower than for either subfertile or fertile women.

The study is the first population-based US comparison of birth outcomes for women who received fertility treatment and those with subfertile indicators who did not use ART. The growth in the use of ART has raised concerns about a range of perinatal outcomes, including an excess of preterm births, low birth weight, and neonatal death. But because previous studies have compared ART birth outcomes with spontaneous conceptions, it has remained unclear whether differences in outcomes are related to underlying subfertility or other factors, such as the older average age of mothers.

The study suggests that both underlying subfertility and ART itself may influence outcomes. Among singletons, the differences in rates of preterm birth and low birth weights were more pronounced when comparing the ART group to fertile women than to subfertile women, indicating that underlying fertility problems may play a role in those outcomes.

“Overall, these (findings) suggest an underlying risk associated with subfertility, distinct from that which may result from ART,” the authors say.

Among twins, the study suggests that babies born after ART appear to have better outcomes. ART twin births compared with subfertile births had a longer mean gestational age, lower rate of very premature delivery and very low birth weight, and a much lower rate of perinatal death.

While the authors reached no conclusions, they say one possible explanation for the better ART outcomes was “the special baby” hypothesis, which posits that extra attention given to ART births by both parents and caregivers may contribute to more favorable outcomes. Mothers in the ART group tended to be older and more likely to deliver by cesarean section than the other groups studied.

“It may be possible that ART-related births involved greater attention to care,” the authors say, adding that “more sensitive and comprehensive measures of prenatal care than are currently available on a population basis will be necessary to determine if a ‘special baby’ hypothesis is supported.”

The study is the first one published by a collaboration dubbed MOSART—for the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technologies—which brings together SPH childbirth experts with researchers from five other institutions to probe how ART influences health outcomes for women and children. The collaboration is funded through a five-year grant from the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Child Health and Development.

The study links detailed clinical information on ART treatment from all ART clinics in Massachusetts from 2004 to 2008 with data on births, fetal deaths, and hospital records in the state. The subfertility comparison group was developed by means of an algorithm that conservatively identified births to women with indicators of subfertility, either through diagnosis codes or maternal reporting.

Declercq says the study is an important first step in “extricating the possible risks of ART from underlying infertility or maternal demographic and health risks.” He hopes for further research taking advantage of the power of linking clinical and population data to examine ART outcomes for both infants and mothers.

Infertility affects an estimated 12 to 15 percent of women of reproductive age. The use of in vitro fertilization and other fertility-enhancing treatments has risen steadily in the US. Treatment with assisted reproductive technologies resulted in 65,160 live born infants in the US in 2012, representing 1.6 percent of all US births.

Besides SPH, the team included researchers from Michigan State University, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Dartmouth College, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

 

Explore Related Topics:

  • Community Health Sciences
  • Fertility
  • Share this story

Share

Birth Outcomes and Assisted Reproductive Technology

Share

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Lisa Chedekel

    Lisa Chedekel Profile

Latest from The Brink

  • Global Debt Relief

    BU Experts Served on Vatican Commission Urging Global Debt Relief

  • Nosiness

    Do You Have a Nosy Coworker? BU Research Finds Snooping Colleagues Send Our Stress Levels Rising

  • Mental Health

    Can Art Help Doctors Improve Mental Health Care for Non-English Speakers?

  • Alzheimer’s Disease

    What a Newly Approved Blood Test Means for Diagnosing Alzheimer’s

  • Partisan Politics

    You’ve Heard of Red States and Blue States. But What About Red and Blue Neighborhoods?

  • Conservation

    River Herring in Martha’s Vineyard Are Disappearing. A BU Marine Biologist Is Trying to Help Save Them

  • Marine Biology

    Protecting Maine’s Coastal Heritage—and Her Own

  • Politics

    BU Historian’s New Book Traces the Rise of Today’s Far Right Movement

  • Encryption

    Our Online World Relies on Encryption. What Happens If It Fails?

  • Art History

    From Wedding Attire to Living Room Curtains: A BU Scholar Is Unraveling the History of Brocade Weaving in Morocco

  • Vaccines

    What to Make of the Recent COVID Vaccine Guidance Changes—and Will You Be Eligible for a Shot This Fall?

  • NEIDL

    Renowned Virologist Robert A. Davey to Lead NEIDL, BU’s Infectious Diseases Research Hub

  • AI and Stolen Art

    Using AI to Identify Plundered Antiquities

  • Campus Climate Lab

    BU Students Win Janetos Climate Action Prize for Uncovering Air Quality Gaps Between Old and New Campus Buildings

  • Low Back Pain

    Finding Non-Opioid Solutions for Low Back Pain

  • Carbon Credits

    Do Forest Carbon Credits Work and Actually Help the Environment?

  • Infectious Diseases

    What’s It Like to Be an Infectious Diseases Outbreak Responder?

  • Autism

    What Causes Autism? And Is There an Autism Epidemic, as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Says?

  • CTE

    NIH Awards $15M to BU-Led Effort to Diagnose CTE During Life

  • Research News

    Brink Bites: Tracking Endangered Frogs, Why Concentration Wanders, Studying Kids’ Beliefs

Section navigation

  • Sections
  • Notable
  • Videos
  • About Us
  • Topics
  • Archive
Subscribe to Newsletter

Explore Our Publications

Bostonia

Boston University’s Alumni Magazine

BU Today

News, Opinion, Community

The Brink

Pioneering Research from Boston University

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • Weibo
  • Medium
© Boston University. All rights reserved. www.bu.edu
© 2025 Trustees of Boston UniversityPrivacy StatementAccessibility
Boston University
Notice of Non-Discrimination: Boston University prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color, natural or protective hairstyle, religion, sex or gender, age, national origin, ethnicity, shared ancestry and ethnic characteristics, physical or mental disability, sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression, genetic information, pregnancy or pregnancy-related condition, military service, marital, parental, veteran status, or any other legally protected status in any and all educational programs or activities operated by Boston University. Retaliation is also prohibited. Please refer questions or concerns about Title IX, discrimination based on any other status protected by law or BU policy, or retaliation to Boston University’s Executive Director of Equal Opportunity/Title IX Coordinator, at titleix@bu.edu or (617) 358-1796. Read Boston University’s full Notice of Nondiscrimination.
Search
Boston University Masterplate
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
Birth Outcomes and Assisted Reproductive Technology
0
share this