Fertility Clinic Video Statistics

Key takeaways

1. 457 U.S. fertility clinics reported 435,426 IVF and other ART cycles to CDC for 2022, and those cycles led to 98,289 live-born infants. (CDC) See details
2. Florida had 26 reporting clinics that performed 18,797 cycles in 2022; clinics in Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties performed 16.9% of them, and Martin County had no reporting clinic (our counts from CDC files). (CDC) See details
3. Fertility clinics and fertility doctors posting as themselves made 49.5% of the on-topic videos among YouTube’s most-viewed IVF, fertility clinic and egg freezing results and drew 42.1% of their views; channels placed in India drew 66.6% of the views and U.S.-placed fertility clinics and doctors 1.9% (our read, Nov 8, 2026). (Mark Studios) See details
4. Videos of 60 seconds or less drew 64.3% of those views. In the year to November 8, 2026, U.S. clinic channels in the sample had a median of 261.5 views per upload, against 3,842 for U.S. fertility doctors’ own channels. (Mark Studios) See details
5. Across six YouTube, TikTok and Instagram fertility video samples in peer-reviewed studies published 2023-2026, the median share made by physicians was 14.7% (our calculation); the 17 content studies in our table analysed 3,886 videos. (Mark Studios) See details
6. Egg or embryo banking made up 42.4% of the ART cycles reported to CDC for 2022, and total reported cycles rose 33.4% from 2020 to 2022 (our calculations from CDC files). (CDC) See details
7. KFF found 27% of firms with 200 or more workers covered IVF in 2026; Mercer reported 47% of employers with 500 or more employees in 2024; the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans found 42% of organizations offer fertility benefits. The samples differ. (KFF) See details
8. The earliest “1 in 8 couples” we found is in RESOLVE’s annual report for 2008. It rests on a count of 7.3 million U.S. women aged 15-44 in the 2002 federal survey, a number CDC listed for both impaired fecundity and ever using infertility services, and neither counted couples; WHO’s “1 in 6” is a pooled lifetime estimate of 17.5%. (RESOLVE) See details
9. Progyny, which manages fertility benefits for employers, says its members had 65,006 ART cycles in 2025 and that it covers about 7.2 million lives. (Progyny) See details

Who makes the most-viewed IVF and fertility clinic videos on YouTube?

Fertility clinics and fertility doctors posting as themselves made 49.5% of the on-topic videos among the most-viewed IVF, fertility clinic and egg freezing videos on YouTube on November 8, 2026, and drew 42.1% of their lifetime views (our count). We read YouTube’s own view-sorted search results for 'IVF', 'fertility clinic' and 'egg freezing' on November 8, 2026, the first four pages for each, through the YouTube Data API with no country filter, and classified every channel by hand from its own title, description and video text. It is one view-sorted search on one day, not a census of fertility video.

The three lists held 565 unique videos from 352 channels, with 834,387,809 lifetime views in all. They barely overlapped: only 31 videos were in two or more lists. Leaving out three off-topic videos, about freezing chicken eggs for food and a game animation, leaves 562 on-topic videos with 834,143,208 views, and the median one had 310,402.5 views. View counts are lifetime snapshots and include ad views.

124 fertility clinic or fertility doctor channels appeared in the November 8, 2026 sample. 45 of them said in their own text that a reproductive endocrinologist or an IVF, infertility or fertility specialist was speaking or led the clinic, and 79 gave only a fertility clinic or IVF centre name or description; we did not check any licence or board certification. Clinic, fertility hospital and clinic-network channels drew 32.1% of the on-topic views, and individual fertility doctors’ own channels drew 10.0% (our count).

How much of fertility YouTube comes from a few channels?

Almost half of it. The ten biggest channels drew 46.3% of the on-topic views in our November 8, 2026 sample, and the three biggest drew 23.5% (our count). None of those three is a clinic.

The most-viewed video was a Vietnamese lifestyle vlogger’s short about her own egg freezing, with 77,853,264 views; we do not name the people behind patient-story channels. Second was Health Cartoons’ animated 'How Test Tube Babies Are Made?', with 52,209,963 views. Medication Knowledge, a hospital pharmacist’s channel in India that posts IVF medicine explainers and clips of a doctor’s embryo transfers, drew 7.9% of all on-topic views on its own.

The most-viewed video from a fertility clinic or fertility doctor was Dr. Rhythm Gupta Excel IVF’s 'Why Tracking Ovulation is Crucial for Conception?', with 27,989,467 views. The most-viewed video from a U.S.-placed fertility clinic was Sher Fertility Solutions’ 'Nurse Linda IVF Medication Injections - Intramuscular Injection', with 7,524,978 views.

Where are the fertility clinic channels based, and do Florida clinics appear?

Mostly in India. 99 of the 124 fertility clinic and fertility doctor channels in our November 8, 2026 sample were in India, and they drew 39.2% of all on-topic views (our count, from each channel’s country setting or, where that was blank, the place its own text names). Channels of Indian clinic chains such as Indira IVF, Nova IVF Fertility and Ferty9 drew 8.4% of the views. Counting channels of every type, those placed in India drew 66.6% of the on-topic views.

U.S. clinics are a small part of what YouTube ranks highest. 14 U.S.-placed fertility clinic and fertility doctor channels appeared in the sample; they posted 3.6% of the on-topic videos and drew 1.9% of the views. A channel counts as U.S.-placed when its own text names a U.S. place or its country setting is the United States.

No Florida fertility clinic appeared. None of the 352 channels behind the sample was a Florida fertility clinic or placed itself in Palm Beach, Broward or Martin County. The only Florida-placed channel was the TV station FOX 35 Orlando, whose one video in the sample, on a Florida couple’s fertility clinic mix-up, had 267,526 views. A search on more queries, or a regional one, might find Florida clinics that this view-sorted global search did not.

Who else posts IVF and egg freezing videos?

Media outlets, above all. Media, TV, news and podcast channels made 27.0% of the on-topic videos in our November 8, 2026 sample (our count). News outlets alone posted 7.1% of the on-topic videos, many of them on clinic mix-ups and the 2025 Palm Springs fertility clinic bombing, and drew 4.2% of the views. Film and TV clips, cartoons and comedy sketches set in a fertility clinic drew 3.7%.

Patients and individuals telling their own IVF or egg freezing story made 5.9% of the videos but drew 13.2% of the views, most of it from the single most-viewed short. Medical animation channels drew 11.7% of the views.

What does each fertility search return?

Each search returns a different mix of channels. Fertility clinics’ and fertility doctors’ own channels drew 74.2% of the views of the on-topic videos in YouTube’s most-viewed results for 'fertility clinic' on November 8, 2026, against 6.9% for 'egg freezing' (our count).

In the 'fertility clinic' list, clinics and fertility doctors in India alone drew 69.9% of the views. In the 'egg freezing' list, patients’ and individuals’ own stories drew 58.2% of the views, most of it from one vlogger’s short (our count).

What are the most-viewed fertility videos about?

IVF itself, egg freezing and how the procedures work. Titles naming IVF or test-tube babies made 48.0% of the on-topic videos on November 8, 2026, and titles about egg freezing 33.8% (our count, a regex on titles with every match read by hand).

Egg freezing is mostly discussed by others. Fertility clinics and fertility doctors posted 20.0% of the on-topic egg freezing videos and drew 4.5% of their views; media outlets, celebrities and people telling their own story drew most of the rest. Explainers draw more than their share: titles that promise to explain a process made 26.5% of the videos and drew 36.8% of the views. Very few titles named surrogacy, PCOS or endometriosis.

How long are the most-viewed fertility videos, and how recent?

Mostly short and recent. Videos of 60 seconds or less made 44.1% of the on-topic videos on November 8, 2026 and drew 64.3% of their views, and the median short had 565,422 views (our count). 69.6% of the on-topic videos were published in 2024 or later.

YouTube’s altered or synthetic content field, which uploaders set themselves, was absent from all 565 videos, including the faceless 3D animation shorts; one of those channels, Brain Spark, says in its own description that its videos use AI-generated visuals. Only 1 video was marked made for kids, an Indian IVF centre’s promotional short.

How often do U.S. fertility clinics and fertility doctors post on YouTube?

Most post rarely, and a few doctors post most of the videos. The 14 U.S.-placed fertility clinic and fertility doctor channels in our November 8, 2026 sample posted 1,341 videos in the year to November 8, 2026, but the median channel posted 9 (our count, from each channel’s uploads playlist). 5 of them posted 100 or more videos and 3 posted none. None of them is in Florida.

The three busiest, Natalie Crawford, MD, Lora Shahine, MD and Sher Fertility Solutions, posted 74.7% of those uploads. Natalie Crawford, MD, a fertility doctor in Austin, Texas, posted 673 on her own.

The year’s uploads had a median of 2,277 views, and 67.3% ran 60 seconds or less. Uploads from clinic and clinic-network channels had a median of 261.5 views, against 3,842 for individual fertility doctors’ own channels.

How good is the fertility information in YouTube, TikTok and Instagram videos?

Physicians make few of the videos and quality scores are mostly low: across six YouTube, TikTok and Instagram fertility video samples in five peer-reviewed studies published from 2023 to 2026 that counted physician creators, the median share made by physicians was 14.7% (our calculation). The 17 content studies in the table below analysed 3,886 videos between them (our calculation). Each study searched its own terms on one date and scored videos its own way, so the table gives every study’s year, platform, sample and finding side by side. DISCERN rates how reliable and complete health information is (16 to 80 on the full scale; some studies use a modified 5-point version).

The videos reach very large audiences. The 93 qualifying videos among the 100 most-viewed #IVF TikTok videos in the 2023 Duke study had 731 million views (Reproductive BioMedicine Online), about 7.9 million each (our calculation). The 1,905 TikTok fertility posts a University of Miami team gathered in September 2024 had 1.8 billion views (1,808,310,047) (Reproductive BioMedicine Online), an average of 949,244 (our calculation). In the 2023 egg freezing study, laypeople made 57.8% of the top TikTok videos and no professional society videos turned up (Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics). China is the exception: in the 2026 study of the TikTok platform in China, medical personnel made most infertility videos. For general medical video, see our healthcare video statistics; for studies of acupuncture alongside IVF, our acupuncture video statistics.

Commercial content is common in the posts around fertility topics. In a 2023 study of the top 100 PCOS posts, a financial conflict of interest was present in 45% of TikTok posts and 89% of Instagram posts (Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology). In April 2019, patients wrote 67% of the top 1,000 Instagram posts under ten fertility hashtags and physicians 10% (Fertility Research and Practice). A 2025 study of 939 educational fertility posts on Instagram and Twitter/X from April 21-28, 2024 found 45% contained inaccurate information; fertility doctors made 29% of them (Human Fertility). Among Instagram fertility influencers with more than 10,000 followers in a 2020 study of 537 accounts, only 7.1% were board-certified reproductive endocrinologists (Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics). These studies counted posts and accounts of any format, not only video.

How many fertility patients look for information online?

Most, in clinic surveys: 87.8% of 558 men and women seeking infertility care in Canada had searched the internet for infertility information and support, in a survey published in 2019 (Journal of Medical Internet Research). Of those who searched, 70.9% said web-based information met their needs (Journal of Medical Internet Research). In a study published in 2000, 42% of 150 patients at two Toronto fertility clinics had used the internet for fertility questions (Fertility and Sterility).

The only national U.S. figure is older. In the 2004-2006 National Survey of Fertility Barriers, a probability sample of U.S. women aged 25 to 45, 25% of 1,352 ever-infertile women had both talked to a doctor and gone online for information, and 9% had only gone online (Social Science & Medicine). In a 2023 survey of 332 Australian women interested in egg freezing, 70% of those who had searched used fertility clinic websites (Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics).

Patients say they want education from their clinic’s social media. In a survey of 244 patients at three U.S. fertility practices published in 2018, 79.9% felt social media benefited the patient experience in the clinic, and 93.4% were interested in posts on infertility testing and treatment (Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics).

How do patients find a fertility specialist, and what do online reviews show?

Mostly through their own doctor: in a July 2022 online survey of 336 U.S. adults aged 18 to 50, 44.64% named asking their primary care physician as their main way to find a fertility specialist, and most said they would not use social media to choose (Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics). The sample was recruited on Amazon Mechanical Turk, not from fertility patients.

Online ratings are high. Across 1,097 U.S. fertility specialists rated on Vitals, RateMD and Healthgrades from 2016 to 2019, private-practice physicians averaged 4.128 of 5 against 3.964 for university or hospital physicians, in a study by University of Central Florida and Winter Park, Florida clinic authors (F&S Reports).

Success-rate advertising is where doctors themselves see a problem. In an April 2012 survey of 277 U.S. reproductive endocrinologists and reproductive surgeons, 76% believed most centers that advertised success rates did so in ways that misled patients (Fertility Research and Practice). A review of all 361 SART-member clinic websites published in 2020 found only 10.5% wholly compliant with SART’s 2018 rules for presenting supplemental data (Fertility and Sterility).

Do education videos help fertility patients?

For knowledge and medication skills, the small trials mostly say yes; for anxiety, results are mixed. In a 2022 U.S. randomized trial at UCSF (368 enrolled, 257 completed), IVF and egg freezing patients who watched videos on preparing and injecting their medications were 63% less likely to make medication errors in the per-protocol analysis, with no change in stress or quality of life (npj Digital Medicine). The trials below are single-center or single-country, and most measured outcomes with their own questionnaires.

Two of the trials have industry ties. The Belgian trial was an investigator-sponsored study for Merck, and the first author of the UCSF medication-video trial disclosed shares in Carrot Inc, a fertility benefits seller.

How did virtual visits work in fertility clinics?

Every responding clinic offered them by 2022, and most expect to keep them: all 216 U.S. fertility clinic contacts and reproductive endocrinologists answering a 2022 survey offered telehealth visits, against about one third before the pandemic, and 87.0% expected to keep offering them (Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics). Zoom was the most used platform.

Patients are satisfied but still prefer in person for a first visit. In a 2023 national survey of 81 U.S. fertility patients who had used telehealth, 81.4% reported satisfaction, but 60.5% preferred an in-person initial consultation (Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics). In a larger 2023 national survey of 682 patients whose first consultation was between January 2018 and September 2022, 69.6% of telemedicine patients were satisfied against 82.6% of in-person patients; two co-authors are affiliated with FertilityIQ, a clinic review company (Reproductive BioMedicine Online). A 2024 meta-analysis of 11 studies (4,697 patients) found 91% satisfaction with telemedicine during fertility treatment and pregnancy rates comparable to in-person care (Reproductive BioMedicine Online).

Access was not equal. At one U.S. academic fertility practice during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021), 57.0% of African American patients had their initial consultation by telehealth against 66.8% of other patients (Fertility and Sterility). In a Dutch randomized trial published in 2025, new infertility patients given an online workup and a 30-minute video consultation scored 2.66 of 3 on patient-centeredness against 2.56 with face-to-face visits, meeting the trial’s non-inferiority margin (Fertility and Sterility).

How many U.S. employers cover IVF?

About one large employer in four covered IVF in 2026: KFF found 27% of firms with 200 or more workers that offer health benefits covered IVF in their largest plan, the same share as in 2024 (KFF). KFF is a nonprofit and does not sell benefits. Its 2026 survey interviewed 1,937 randomly selected employers between January and July 2026 (KFF), and its 2024 survey interviewed 2,142 employers between January and July 2024 (KFF). KFF's 2025 survey did not ask about fertility coverage.

Coverage rises with firm size. In KFF's 2026 survey, 24% of firms with 200 to 999 workers covered IVF, against 38% of firms with 1,000 to 4,999 workers and 47% of firms with 5,000 or more workers (KFF). That is a gap of 23 percentage points between the smallest and largest size groups (our calculation). Many benefit managers do not know their own coverage: 9% of firms with 1,000 or more workers said they did not know whether their plan covers IVF, and firms with 200 to 999 workers were more likely to say so (KFF). In 2024, 30% of large firms answered "don't know" for IVF (KFF).

KFF's 2024 survey asked about each family-building service separately. Among firms with 200 or more workers, 37% covered fertility medications, 26% covered intrauterine insemination, 27% covered IVF and 12% covered egg or sperm freezing (KFF). KFF notes that a "yes" says nothing about how much of the bill the plan pays.

Mercer, a benefits consultant that sells plan design and vendor advice to employers, reports a higher figure for a different cut: 47% of employers with 500 or more employees covered IVF in their largest medical plan in 2024, up from 22% in 2019 (Mercer). That is a rise of 25 percentage points in five years (our calculation). Mercer's article does not print the survey's sample size or field dates. Most large employers that cover IVF cap it: 54% use a lifetime dollar limit and 23% limit the number of cycles, with a median of three cycles covered (Mercer).

Mercer's older fertility report, commissioned by the patient association RESOLVE, gives the earlier baseline. Mercer's national survey found IVF coverage among employers with 500 or more employees at 27% in 2020; egg freezing coverage was 11% in 2020 (Mercer for RESOLVE). In its February 2021 follow-up, 459 employers responded (Mercer for RESOLVE), and 97% of those that had added infertility coverage said it did not significantly raise medical plan cost (Mercer for RESOLVE). That is the employers' own view, not a claims analysis.

The International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans, a nonprofit education association for benefit plan professionals, counts all organizations rather than only large ones. Its 2024 Employee Benefits Survey found 42% of U.S. organizations offer some fertility benefit and 32% cover IVF, up from 13% in 2016 (IFEBP). That is a rise of 19 percentage points over eight years (our calculation). Egg harvesting or freezing services reached 16% of organizations in 2024 (IFEBP). The Foundation's press release does not give the sample size or field dates.

The surveys below use different samples, firm-size cuts and questions, so their percentages are not directly comparable. KFF weights to all U.S. firms of a given size, Mercer reports employers with 500 or more employees, and IFEBP reports the organizations that answered its survey.

What do fertility benefit sellers' own surveys say?

Maven Clinic, which sells fertility and family benefits to employers, found in its 2026 report that the share of employers offering fertility benefits rose 40% year over year, while employees' sense that those benefits support them fell 11% (Maven Clinic). Maven ran two online surveys from November 6 to 19, 2025, one of 2,071 HR and benefits decision-makers and one of employees, at companies with more than 500 people in the U.S., U.K., Canada and India (Maven Clinic). The figures are not U.S.-only.

Carrot Fertility commissioned a survey of 5,000 employed adults aged 25 to 40 who were planning or building a family, split across Canada, India, Mexico, the UK and the U.S., fielded March 9 to 13, 2023 (Carrot Fertility). Only 32% said they could afford fertility treatment if needed (Carrot Fertility). Among those without the money, 29% said they may take on debt (Carrot Fertility), and 42% of all respondents said a job offer with no fertility benefits would be a deal breaker (Carrot Fertility).

What does a cycle of IVF or egg freezing cost?

California's Health Benefits Review Program, which analyses bills for the state Legislature, put the average unit cost of IVF at $14,660 for enrollees in state-regulated California plans in its April 2023 analysis of SB 729, with ICSI adding $1,400 (CHBRP). That is a California estimate, not a national price, and it is the closest public estimate we found.

Mercer's October 2025 article states that a single IVF cycle costs $12,000 to $25,000, a widely repeated range, but names no source for it (Mercer). Mercer also says specialty drugs can be as much as 40% of a cycle's cost, again without a named data source (Mercer).

Clinic list prices vary widely, and each is one clinic's self-pay price, not an average. CNY Fertility, which markets itself as a low-cost clinic, lists a complete IVF cycle at $7,994 to around $12,888 (CNY Fertility). It lists egg freezing, with medications, monitoring and a year of storage, at $7,594 (CNY Fertility), and storage at $600 a year (CNY Fertility). Shady Grove Fertility estimates egg freezing medications alone at $4,500 to $8,500 per cycle (Shady Grove Fertility). Kindbody lists a first fertility consultation at $300 (Kindbody). Prices were read on each clinic's own page on November 8, 2026.

How big are the U.S. fertility clinic networks?

US Fertility, the network with the largest counts we found printed, says it supports 200+ reproductive endocrinologists and reproductive urologists in 135+ locations with 32 IVF labs (US Fertility). Its member practices include Shady Grove Fertility and IVF Florida (US Fertility). Shady Grove alone says it has 60 locations (Shady Grove Fertility). Together, the four networks that publish physician counts report at least 422 physicians (our calculation). All figures below are the companies' own, unaudited statements, read November 8, 2026.

Pinnacle's own pages disagree on its location count; the table uses the about page's 50+. Everleap Fertility is the new North American name for the IVI-RMA clinics. CCRM and Kindbody do not print network totals on the pages we read. IntegraMed's website did not respond.

Which networks have fertility clinics in Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties?

Only 2 of the 6 clinic networks whose Florida location lists we could read have a location in Palm Beach, Broward or Martin County: US Fertility, through IVF Florida, and CNY Fertility (our count). IVF Florida lists 8 Florida locations: Jensen Beach, Boca Raton, Coral Gables, Jacksonville, Jupiter/Palm Beach Gardens, Margate, Pembroke Pines and Wellington (IVF Florida). 6 of them are in the three counties (our count): 3 in Palm Beach County, two in Broward and one in Martin.

Counting network-owned locations only, Broward has 3 (our count): IVF Florida's Margate and Pembroke Pines sites, and CNY Fertility's satellite clinic in Hollywood, FL (CNY Fertility). Martin County has 1, IVF Florida's Jensen Beach office (our count), though CDC's 2022 file lists 0 reporting clinics there: an office can see patients without reporting cycles under its own name.

Other networks are in Florida but not in these counties. Shady Grove Fertility lists 7 Florida locations, from Brandon to Orlando and Lakewood Ranch, all in the Tampa, Orlando and Sarasota areas (our count) (Shady Grove Fertility). CCRM's only Florida clinic is CCRM Fertility of Miami in Aventura, Miami-Dade County (CCRM Fertility). Kindbody, Pinnacle and Ivy list no Florida clinic. The ART section of this page counts every clinic that reports to CDC, including independent practices.

How many fertility networks offer virtual consults?

4 of the 8 clinic networks whose sites we read say they offer virtual or telehealth consults (our count, November 2026). Shady Grove lists virtual new-patient consults at its Florida offices (Shady Grove Fertility). CNY Fertility's Hollywood clinic lists Telehealth Consultations (CNY Fertility). Kindbody lists a "Virtual" location and offers virtual consultations with a board-certified physician (Kindbody). Pinnacle says its NW Arkansas clinic is now seeing patients Virtually (Pinnacle Fertility). We found no virtual-consult statement on the CCRM, Everleap, Inception or Ivy pages we read. That does not mean they offer none.

How many fertility clinics are there in the United States?

CDC’s 2022 Final ART Services and Profiles dataset lists 457 U.S. fertility clinics that reported 2022 cycles to its National ART Surveillance System (CDC). That is CDC’s count of clinics that reported, not of every clinic: the same file lists 54 clinics as non-reporters, clinics known to offer ART that sent no 2022 data (CDC). CDC’s own description is that about 500 U.S. clinics provide ART services (CDC, Internet Archive), and it estimates the system holds about 98% of all U.S. ART cycles, because most non-reporting clinics are small (CDC, Internet Archive). ART (assisted reproductive technology) means treatments in which eggs or embryos are handled outside the body: mostly IVF, plus egg and embryo freezing and donation. Intrauterine insemination (IUI) and drug-only ovarian stimulation are not ART, so clinics that offer only those are not in these counts.

The number of reporting clinics barely moved. CDC’s 2021 file lists 453 reporting clinics (CDC) and its 2020 file 449 (CDC), so the count rose 1.8% from 2020 to 2022 (our calculation). 2022 is the newest final year: on November 8, 2026 data.cdc.gov held 2020, 2021 and 2022 Final ART datasets and no 2023 dataset.

Clinics vary a lot in size. The median reporting clinic performed 511 ART cycles in 2022, and 133 of the 457 reporting clinics performed 1,000 or more (our calculation from CDC’s clinic-level file).

How many IVF and other ART cycles do U.S. clinics perform?

U.S. fertility clinics reported 435,426 ART cycles to CDC for 2022 (CDC). A cycle is one treatment started: an intended egg retrieval, a frozen embryo transfer, or an egg or embryo banking cycle. CDC says those cycles were performed on 251,542 unique patients (CDC, Internet Archive). The count rose 33.4% from 2020 to 2022 (our calculation), faster than the number of clinics.

The 2022 cycles led to 94,039 live-birth deliveries (CDC) and 98,289 live-born infants (CDC); a twin birth is one delivery and two infants, and some deliveries fell in 2023. CDC says these infants were about 2.6% of all infants born in the United States (CDC, Internet Archive).

Patients using their own eggs had 182,198 intended egg retrievals in 2022 (CDC), and clinics performed 206,271 embryo transfers (CDC). Most transfers used frozen embryos: 86.9% did in 2022 (CDC). At least one embryo had preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) in 58.2% of transfers (CDC). Patients over 40 accounted for 20.0% of 2022 cycles (CDC).

How common are egg freezing and embryo banking cycles?

Very common: CDC says 184,423 of the ART cycles reported for 2022 were egg or embryo banking cycles, in which all resulting eggs or embryos were frozen for future use (CDC, Internet Archive). That is 42.4% of all 2022 cycles (our calculation). Banking covers both egg freezing for later and embryos frozen for a later IVF transfer.

CDC also counts fertility preservation cycles separately, and that count grew fastest. Clinics reported 40,039 fertility preservation cycles for 2022 (CDC), up from 24,120 in 2020 (CDC), a rise of 66.0% (our calculation). Nearly every reporting clinic offers freezing: 99% offer egg cryopreservation (CDC) and 100% embryo cryopreservation (CDC), as each clinic reports it to CDC.

How many clinics offer donor eggs and gestational carriers?

Most do: 88% of clinics reporting to CDC for 2022 offer donor egg services (CDC) and 90% offer gestational carrier services (CDC). 80% are members of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART), the professional society that keeps the list of operating ART clinics together with CDC (CDC). CDC’s services file has no field for treating single women or same-sex couples, and none for whether a clinic offers PGT, so those shares cannot be read from it.

Use is smaller than availability. Clinics performed 25,341 embryo transfers in 2022 for patients using donor eggs, donor embryos or donated embryos (CDC), and 4.7% of all 2022 transfers used a gestational carrier (CDC).

What do CDC’s IVF success rates measure?

They are averages across a year’s patients, not any one person’s chance. In 2022, 49.7% of intended egg retrievals among U.S. patients under 35 using their own eggs led to a live-birth delivery, a cumulative rate that also counts later transfers of embryos from the same retrieval (CDC). For patients over 40 the national figure was 7.7% (CDC). CDC’s ART Success Rates page says average chances may not reflect actual success rates for an individual or couple, and that rates vary with age, diagnosis, earlier pregnancies and the procedures used.

How many fertility clinics does Florida have?

Florida had 26 fertility clinics reporting to CDC in 2022, the fourth most of any state and 5.7% of the U.S. total (our calculation). The count was also 26 in 2020 (CDC). Florida’s reporting clinics performed 18,797 ART cycles in 2022, 4.3% of all U.S. cycles, and those cycles led to 4,017 live-born infants (our calculation from CDC’s clinic-level file). All 26 of Florida’s reporting clinics said they offer egg freezing (our calculation).

Counted by where patients live rather than where clinics are, Florida uses ART less than the country as a whole. CDC counts 12,049 ART procedures started in 2022 by Florida residents with the intent to transfer an embryo, a count that leaves out banking cycles (CDC, Internet Archive). That is 2,566 procedures per 1 million Florida women aged 15-49 (CDC, Internet Archive), against 3,301 for the United States (CDC, Internet Archive). CDC says 1.9% of infants born to Florida residents in 2022 were conceived with ART (CDC, Internet Archive), below the national 2.6%.

How many fertility clinics are in Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties?

Palm Beach County had 2 fertility clinics reporting to CDC in 2022, Broward County 2 and Martin County 0, by our count from CDC’s 2022 clinic-level file. CDC also lists a non-reporting Palm Beach County clinic, in Boca Raton. Together the three counties’ clinics performed 16.9% of Florida’s reported ART cycles (our calculation). Next door, Miami-Dade County had 4 reporting clinics performing 4,751 cycles (our calculation).

CDC places each clinic at its own address, so a clinic counts in one county even if it treats patients from many. We assigned counties by hand from each clinic’s city and ZIP code. The full Florida list, with each clinic’s city, county and 2022 counts from CDC, is in our Florida clinic CSV.

How many OB/GYNs, the occupation that includes fertility specialists, work in the U.S.?

Obstetricians and gynecologists held about 22,800 U.S. jobs in 2025, counting the self-employed, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Outlook Handbook (BLS). BLS has no occupation code for reproductive endocrinologists (fertility specialists): they are counted inside Obstetricians and Gynecologists (SOC 29-1218), so every figure in this section covers all OB/GYNs, not fertility specialists alone.

BLS’s Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey of employers counted 21,260 wage and salary OB/GYN jobs (SOC 29-1218) in May 2025 (BLS), with a relative standard error of 5.7% (BLS). The OEWS survey leaves out OB/GYNs who own unincorporated practices and pay themselves from profits; BLS’s Employment Projections put the self-employed share of U.S. OB/GYN jobs at 3.8% in 2025 (BLS).

OB/GYNs held 2.8% of the 754,760 U.S. wage and salary physician jobs (SOC 29-1210, physicians other than surgeons) that BLS OEWS counted in May 2025 (BLS) (our calculation).

How much do OB/GYNs earn?

The median annual wage for U.S. wage and salary obstetricians and gynecologists (SOC 29-1218, all OB/GYNs) was $292,910 in May 2025, per BLS OEWS (BLS). The mean for the same group was $279,040 (BLS). That median was 5.7 times the $50,980 median for all U.S. wage and salary occupations in May 2025 (BLS) (our calculation). These OEWS figures cover wages and salaries only, not practice owners’ profits, and BLS publishes no separate pay figure for reproductive endocrinologists.

Where do OB/GYNs work?

Offices of physicians (NAICS 6211) employed 14,200 U.S. wage and salary OB/GYNs (SOC 29-1218) in May 2025, per BLS OEWS (BLS): 66.8% of the national total (our calculation). General medical and surgical hospitals (NAICS 6221) employed 4,600 (BLS), or 21.6% (our calculation). Outpatient care centers (NAICS 6214), the industry group that holds family planning centers, employed 1,070 (BLS).

BLS has no separate industry for fertility clinics. Under the industry definitions, a fertility practice is filed either as an office of physicians or as a family planning center, the two shared industries described in the next section.

How many OB/GYNs work in Florida and South Florida?

BLS OEWS estimated 1,620 wage and salary OB/GYN jobs (SOC 29-1218, all OB/GYNs) in Florida in May 2025 (BLS), 7.6% of the U.S. count (our calculation). The relative standard error of that Florida estimate was 36.1% (BLS), so treat the May 2025 count as rough. Florida’s location quotient for OB/GYNs was 1.19 in May 2025 (BLS): the occupation made up a larger share of Florida’s wage and salary jobs than of all U.S. jobs.

BLS did not release any May 2025 wage estimate for Florida OB/GYNs: every Florida pay cell for SOC 29-1218 carries the footnote “Estimate not released.” OEWS published no May 2025 OB/GYN series at all for the Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach metro area, which holds Palm Beach and Broward counties, or for the Port St. Lucie metro area, which holds Martin County, and it publishes no estimates for the West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Boynton Beach or Fort Lauderdale metropolitan divisions.

How fast is OB/GYN employment expected to grow?

BLS projects U.S. OB/GYN employment (SOC 29-1218, all OB/GYNs) to grow 1.7% from 2025 to 2035, per its Employment Projections (BLS), against 3.5% for all occupations over the same decade (BLS). The Occupational Outlook Handbook puts that at 23,200 U.S. OB/GYN jobs in 2035, up from 22,800 in 2025 (BLS). BLS expects about 0.5 thousand openings for U.S. OB/GYNs each year from 2025 to 2035, from growth and from replacing doctors who retire or leave the occupation (BLS). BLS makes no projection for reproductive endocrinologists on their own.

Which industry codes count fertility clinics?

No federal industry code counts fertility clinics on their own. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) files them in two shared codes. Family planning centers (NAICS 621410) covers centers with medical staff that provide contraceptive services, genetic and prenatal counseling, voluntary sterilization and termination of pregnancy; the 2022 NAICS Manual lists fertility clinics among its examples, beside birth control clinics, childbirth preparation classes and pregnancy counseling centers (Census, 2022 NAICS descriptions). A fertility practice run by physicians in their own offices is filed under offices of physicians (NAICS 621111), which every physician specialty except psychiatry shares. Every figure in this section therefore covers whole industries, not fertility clinics alone. Other specialty pages, such as our dermatology and orthopedic surgeon video statistics, carry the same shared physician-office figures.

How many family planning centers are there in the U.S.?

BLS’s Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), which counts employers covered by unemployment insurance, averaged 3,113 private U.S. family planning centers (NAICS 621410, the shared code that holds fertility clinics run as centers) in 2025 (BLS), up from 2,030 in 2019 (BLS): a rise of 53.3% (our calculation). These centers employed an average of 29,481 people in 2025 (BLS), and average annual pay across all their jobs, from front desk to physician, was $71,186 (BLS).

The Census Bureau’s County Business Patterns, which also counts nonprofit centers with paid staff, counted 3,591 U.S. employer family planning centers in 2023, with 34,441 employees in mid-March (Census). 2023 is the newest County Business Patterns year. Census’s Nonemployer Statistics publishes no count of family planning centers without paid staff: its outpatient care figures stop at the four-digit level.

How much do family planning centers and physician offices earn, and how many earn from telemedicine?

U.S. employer family planning centers (NAICS 621410, shared) had receipts of $4,618,698 thousand (about $4.6 billion) in 2022 across 2,622 establishments, per the 2022 Economic Census, the Census Bureau’s full count of businesses every five years (Census). 702 of those centers reported some revenue from telemedicine services in 2022 (Census): 26.8% of them (our calculation).

U.S. employer offices of physicians of all specialties (NAICS 621111) had receipts of $630,209,309 thousand (about $630 billion) in 2022 across 201,360 establishments (Census). 86,466 of them reported telemedicine revenue in 2022 (Census), or 42.9% (our calculation). The 2022 telemedicine table counts establishments with any telemedicine revenue; it does not say how much of their revenue came from it. None of the 2022 Economic Census product lines for either industry names fertility, infertility or assisted reproduction: patient-care receipts are split by the ICD-10 chapter of the primary diagnosis.

How many physician offices of all specialties are there in the U.S.?

BLS’s QCEW averaged 226,698 private U.S. offices of physicians of all specialties (NAICS 621111) in 2025 (BLS). They employed an average of 2.9 million people (2,904,306) in 2025 (BLS), and average annual pay across all jobs in those offices was $116,597 (BLS). Fertility practices run as physician offices are inside these totals but are not counted separately.

How much do physician offices of all specialties spend on advertising?

U.S. offices of physicians of all specialties (NAICS 6211) spent $1,815,721 thousand, about $1.8 billion, on advertising and promotion in 2024, per the Census Bureau’s Annual Integrated Economic Survey (Census). That was 0.28% of their $652,560,160 thousand in total 2024 operating expenses (our calculation). Census does not publish advertising spending for fertility practices, for family planning centers or for NAICS 621111 on its own.

How many family planning centers and physician offices are there in Florida and in Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties?

Florida averaged 208 private family planning centers (NAICS 621410, shared) in 2025, per BLS’s QCEW (BLS), up 46.5% from 142 in 2019 (BLS) (our calculation). Florida’s centers employed an average of 1,700 people in 2025 (BLS), with average annual pay of $63,158 (BLS). Florida also averaged 21,918 private offices of physicians of all specialties (NAICS 621111) in 2025 (BLS).

Together Palm Beach, Broward and Martin counties averaged 37 private family planning centers and 4,556 private offices of physicians of all specialties in 2025 (our calculation from QCEW annual averages). BLS withholds Martin County’s family planning center jobs and pay to protect the confidentiality of its 2 employers. Neither BLS nor Census publishes a county count of fertility clinics.

How many Americans have infertility?

13.4% of U.S. women ages 15–49 had impaired fecundity in 2015–2019, meaning physical difficulty getting pregnant or carrying a pregnancy to term, by the count of the National Center for Health Statistics’ National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), an in-person survey of the U.S. household population (NCHS, NSFG Key Statistics). The narrower medical measure of infertility, 12 or more months of unprotected sex with the same husband without a pregnancy, applied to 8.5% of currently married women ages 15–49 in the same survey cycle (NCHS, NSFG Key Statistics). Counting married and cohabiting women together, the figure was 7.8% (NCHS, National Health Statistics Report 202). Among married women ages 15–44, the share who were infertile rose to 8.7% in 2015–2019 from the 2011–2015 survey (NCHS, National Health Statistics Report 202).

Men are counted too. In the 2015–2019 NSFG, 11.4% of men ages 15–49 had some form of infertility, either subfertility or nonsurgical sterility (NCHS, National Health Statistics Report 202). All of these measures come from answers to survey questions, not medical exams, and the 2015–2019 cycle is the newest one NCHS has published infertility rates for.

Age and prior births change the picture. Among women ages 40–49 who had never given birth, 33.4% had impaired fecundity in 2015–2019 (NCHS, NSFG Key Statistics). Among currently married women ages 15–49, 19.4% of those with no births were infertile (NCHS, NSFG Key Statistics), against 6.0% of those with one or more births (NCHS, NSFG Key Statistics): 3.2 times the rate (our calculation, a rough ratio of two survey estimates).

What does WHO’s global infertility estimate measure?

The World Health Organization’s 2023 report “Infertility prevalence estimates, 1990–2021” puts lifetime infertility prevalence at 17.5% worldwide (WHO). It is a pooled estimate from a systematic review: WHO kept 133 studies published from 1990 to 2021, which used varying definitions and populations, and found no studies from its South-East Asia Region. Lifetime prevalence is the share of a population that has ever experienced infertility. WHO’s period prevalence, the share with infertility at a given point or interval in time, is 12.6% (WHO).

For the WHO Region of the Americas, the pooled lifetime estimate is 20.0%, from 10 studies (WHO), and the period estimate is 10.4%, from 5 studies (WHO). WHO’s news release puts lifetime prevalence in high-income countries at 17.8% (WHO). WHO notes that the regional confidence intervals overlap, so the regional differences may not be real. The popular “1 in 6” line rounds the 17.5% lifetime figure; our origins section looks at how it is used.

Why do infertility figures differ so much from source to source?

Each source counts a different thing. The NSFG asks a sample of U.S. adults about the past 12 months and their physical ability to have a baby; WHO pools studies from many countries, some counting couples, some women and some men, over a lifetime or a period; KFF asks women whether they or a partner ever needed fertility services. The table sets them side by side. None of them is a count of patients seen by fertility clinics.

How many U.S. women have used fertility services, and which ones?

13.7% of U.S. women ages 20–49 had ever used any fertility services in 2022–2023, defined as medical help to get pregnant or to prevent pregnancy loss, according to NCHS’s analysis of 4,856 women in the 2022–2023 NSFG (NCHS Data Brief 542). Medical help to get pregnant alone was used by 10.4% (NCHS Data Brief 542). More intensive treatments are rarer: 1.6% had ever used IVF or another assisted reproductive technology, (NCHS Data Brief 542), and 2.0% had artificial insemination (NCHS Data Brief 542). That makes IVF users about 15.4% of the women who had used medical help to get pregnant (our calculation, from rounded published percentages).

The 2015–2019 survey used a wider age range, so it is a baseline rather than a trend line: 12.2% of women ages 15–49 had ever received any infertility services (NCHS, NSFG Key Statistics), and 0.5% had used assisted reproductive technology (NCHS, NSFG Key Statistics).

Use rises with income and private insurance. In 2022–2023, ever use of any fertility services reached 17.2% among women ages 20–49 with family incomes at 450% or more of the federal poverty level (NCHS Data Brief 542), and 13.6% of women with private insurance had used medical help to get pregnant (NCHS Data Brief 542). NCHS also links use to diagnosed conditions: 45.2% of women ages 20–49 ever diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) had current fertility problems (NCHS Health E-Stat 121), and 30.7% of women diagnosed with endometriosis had ever used fertility services (NCHS Health E-Stat 121).

How many women say they needed fertility care but did not get it?

15% of U.S. women ages 18–49 said they or their partner had ever needed fertility services to become pregnant or prevent a miscarriage, in the 2026 KFF Women’s Health Survey of 3,538 women in that age group, fielded online and by phone from March 11 to April 14, 2026 (KFF). 11% said they or their partner received fertility assistance, and a quarter of those said they still could not get all the care they needed (KFF). Reported need rises with age: 19% of women ages 36–49 said they had needed fertility services (KFF). KFF, a nonprofit health policy organization, does not sell fertility services. Its 2024 survey of 3,901 women ages 18–49 found 13% reporting a need (KFF).

In the same 2026 KFF survey of women ages 18-49, among those who said they or a partner needed fertility care, 13% reported receiving IVF (KFF). Income splits that group: 17% of women with higher incomes who needed care obtained IVF (KFF), compared with 3% of women with low incomes (KFF). These are self-reports from a survey, not clinic records.

How many babies are born in the United States each year?

3,628,934 births were registered in the United States in 2024, slightly more than in the record-low year 2023, by NCHS’s final count of every birth certificate filed (NCHS, Births: Final Data for 2024). The general fertility rate was a record low 53.8 births per 1,000 women ages 15–44 (NCHS), and the total fertility rate, the births 1,000 women would have over their lifetimes at that year’s rates, was a record low 1,599.5 (NCHS). Mothers are older at their first birth: the mean age reached a record 27.6 years in 2024 (NCHS).

Provisional 2025 data, based on nearly all birth records processed by February 3, 2026, show 3,606,400 births (NCHS, Births: Provisional Data for 2025), or 22,534 fewer than in 2024 (our calculation). The provisional general fertility rate was 53.1 births per 1,000 females ages 15–44 (NCHS). Final 2025 figures may differ.

Are more U.S. women having babies in their late 30s and 40s?

The U.S. birth rate for women ages 40–44 was 12.7 births per 1,000 women in 2024, the highest since 1965, by NCHS’s final count (NCHS, Births: Final Data for 2024). It was 10.6 in 2014 (NCHS), a rise of 19.8% in a decade (our calculation). The rate for women ages 35–39 was 54.3 in 2024, unchanged from 2023 (NCHS). First-birth rates rose 4% for women ages 40–44 from 2023 to 2024 while they fell for women in their teens and 20s (NCHS).

NCHS’s own decade comparison, using revised population estimates, finds the fertility rate for women 40 and older up 24% from 2015 to 2024 (NCHS Data Brief 556) and the rate for women ages 35–39 up 5% (NCHS Data Brief 556). In the provisional 2025 count, women ages 35–39 had 640,234 births (NCHS), women ages 40–44 had 142,927 (NCHS) and women 45 and older had 11,319 (NCHS). Together that is 794,480 births to women 35 and older (our calculation), or 22.0% of all U.S. births in 2025 (our calculation). Birth certificates record the mother’s age, not whether fertility treatment was used.

How many babies are born in Florida, and how old are the mothers?

Florida residents had 224,389 births in 2024, by NCHS’s final count by mother’s state of residence (NCHS, Births: Final Data for 2024), or 6.2% of all U.S. births (our calculation). Florida’s birth rate for women ages 40–44 was 13.5 per 1,000 in 2024 (NCHS), 6.3% above the U.S. rate of 12.7 (our calculation). Over the decade from 2015 to 2024, Florida’s fertility rate for women 40 and older rose 29% (NCHS Data Brief 556) and its rate for women ages 35–39 rose 8% (NCHS Data Brief 556). NCHS’s national reports do not break births out by county.

What do Americans say about IVF and fertility treatment?

42% of U.S. adults said they had used fertility treatments or personally knew someone who had, in a Pew Research Center survey of 5,073 adults on its American Trends Panel from April 10 to 16, 2023, up from about a third in Pew’s 2018 survey (Pew Research Center). In the same survey, 61% said health insurance should cover the cost of fertility treatments (Pew Research Center). In Pew’s April 8–14, 2024 survey of 8,709 adults, seven in ten (70%) said access to IVF is a good thing (Pew Research Center).

Gallup’s Values and Beliefs poll, by telephone with 1,024 adults from May 1 to 23, 2024, found 82% saying IVF is morally acceptable, the first year Gallup asked; the IVF question went to a random half of the sample (Gallup). Pew and Gallup are opinion researchers and do not sell into the fertility market. Knowing someone who used treatment, or approving of IVF, is not the same as using it: the NSFG figures above measure use.

Do fertility companies tell investors about video and social media?

INVO Fertility and Femasys name social media, and Femasys online video, as ways they reach patients in their newest annual reports. INVO Fertility, which owns fertility clinics, says in its fiscal 2025 10-K that the principal source of patient flow to its clinics is social media marketing, OB/GYN referrals and patient word of mouth, and that it runs regular social and other media campaigns (INVO Fertility 10-K). Femasys, a device maker selling an insemination product to gynecologists and reproductive endocrinologists, says in its fiscal 2025 10-K that it markets directly to patients through social media, a practitioner locator on a patient website and online videos (Femasys 10-K). Progyny, a listed fertility benefits seller, says only that it uses email and social media platforms as marketing tools and keeps corporate accounts (Progyny 10-K). None of the three gives a marketing budget by channel.

Video is rare in fertility filings over the long run. From 2001 to 2025, 42 Form 10-Ks contained both IVF or in vitro fertilization and the word "video", and only 1 describes fertility patient-education video, by our read of each filing on SEC EDGAR (our calculation). That one is IntegraMed America's fiscal 2001 annual report, which said consumers could order an educational video, take an online tutorial and apply for appointments and treatment financing on its fertility portal (IntegraMed 10-K for fiscal 2001). Of the other filings, 9 are INVO's description of a microscope with a video system, 13 are video visits or telehealth in health plans and products, and 18 are unrelated. By its fiscal 2011 10-K, IntegraMed described recruiting patients through internet web portals and search engines, in-clinic materials and online patient service staff (IntegraMed 10-K for fiscal 2011).

How many people do Progyny's fertility benefits cover, and how many IVF cycles do they use?

Progyny, which sells fertility and family-building benefits to self-insured employers, says it had more than 590 employer clients, each with at least 1,000 covered lives, in its fiscal 2025 10-K (Progyny 10-K). Those contracts cover about 7.2 million employees and dependents (Progyny 10-K). Progyny puts its whole market at about 106 million potential covered lives at roughly 9,000 large U.S. employers plus union and federal populations, a company estimate with no source named (Progyny 10-K). By that measure it covers 6.8% of its own market (our calculation). It had 6.7 million members at the end of 2025 (Progyny 10-K).

Progyny members had 65,006 assisted reproductive treatment (ART) cycles in 2025, up from 61,114 in 2024, counting IVF with fresh transfer, freeze-all cycles, frozen embryo transfers and egg freezing (Progyny 10-K). That is about 9.7 ART cycles per 1,000 average members (our calculation); members include men, children and people not trying to conceive, so this is not a population rate. In 2025, 1.32% of all members used any part of the fertility benefit, and 1.04% counting women only (Progyny 10-K).

Cycles grew 4.8-fold from 2019 to 2025 (our calculation), mostly because Progyny signed more employers rather than because each member used more. Its fiscal 2019 10-K reported 13,550 cycles in 2019 (Progyny 10-K for fiscal 2019), its fiscal 2021 10-K 28,413 in 2021 (Progyny 10-K for fiscal 2021) and its fiscal 2023 10-K 58,013 in 2023 (Progyny 10-K for fiscal 2023). Its client count went from over 130 in the fiscal 2019 10-K (Progyny 10-K for fiscal 2019) to over 265 in the fiscal 2021 10-K (Progyny 10-K for fiscal 2021) and over 450 in the fiscal 2023 10-K (Progyny 10-K for fiscal 2023), about 4.5 times as many by fiscal 2025 (our calculation from rounded company figures).

Progyny's revenue grew 5.6-fold from 2019 to 2025 (our calculation). In 2025, fertility benefit services brought in $830.9 million ($830,929 thousand) (Progyny 10-K) and the Progyny Rx fertility drug benefit $457.7 million ($457,732 thousand) (Progyny 10-K), so treatment services were 64.5% of revenue (our calculation). 92% of clients under contract also buy Progyny Rx (Progyny 10-K). No client accounted for more than 10% of 2025 revenue; in 2024 one client accounted for 12% and ended its contract at the start of 2025 (Progyny 10-K).

How do members of a fertility benefit plan choose a clinic, according to the filings?

Progyny says its members choose their preferred provider clinics within its network in consultation with Progyny Care Advocates, staff it says are not licensed to provide healthcare services (Progyny 10-K). Its fiscal 2025 10-K does not mention online reviews, clinic websites or video as part of that choice.

The network is the menu. Progyny's fiscal 2025 10-K lists over 1,100 fertility specialists at over 690 provider clinic locations in the U.S. (Progyny 10-K), including 45 of the top 50 U.S. fertility practice groups by volume in CDC's 2022 data (Progyny 10-K). Its fiscal 2019 10-K listed about 800 specialists at about 600 locations (Progyny 10-K for fiscal 2019). Clinic locations grew 15% while membership multiplied (our calculation).

Progyny also compares its members' outcomes with the clinics' CDC-reported results. In its fiscal 2025 10-K, set against CDC’s 2022 clinic data and SART’s 2021 summary, it reports a live birth rate per attempted egg retrieval of 46.7% for its members at in-network clinics, against 36.8% for all patients at the same clinics and a 34.9% national average (Progyny 10-K), and says its typical member needs 2.1 retrievals per live birth against a national 3.6 (Progyny 10-K). These are a benefits seller's own comparisons, not a controlled study; patient mix differs between the groups, and no clinic's rate predicts any one patient's chance.

How much do fertility device and drug makers sell?

CooperSurgical, the women's health and fertility unit of The Cooper Companies, had fertility net sales of $524.6 million in fiscal 2025 (year ended October 31), up 3%, mainly from genomic and donor gamete services, according to Cooper's 10-K (Cooper 10-K for fiscal 2025). Fertility was 38.9% of CooperSurgical's net sales (our calculation). The line was $105.2 million in fiscal 2015 (Cooper 10-K for fiscal 2015), $258.1 million in fiscal 2019 (Cooper 10-K for fiscal 2019), $319.2 million in fiscal 2021 after the COVID-19 dip of fiscal 2020 (Cooper 10-K for fiscal 2021) and $480.0 million in fiscal 2023 (Cooper 10-K for fiscal 2023). That is 5.0 times the fiscal 2015 level and 129.0% above fiscal 2020 (our calculations), growth that includes acquisitions such as Generate Life Sciences in December 2021. Cooper's fiscal 2025 10-K lists rising infertility rates, rising maternal age, growing patient awareness and access, and a rising number of fertility clinics worldwide as market trends, without figures (Cooper 10-K).

Organon's Follistim AQ, a hormone used to stimulate egg growth for IVF, had sales of $264 million in 2025, $112 million of it in the U.S. (Organon 10-K). Its Ganirelix injection, used alongside it, had sales of $101 million (Organon 10-K). Together the two came to $365 million, 34.0% of it in the U.S. (our calculation). Organon says Follistim AQ sales rose 11% on higher U.S. demand, partly offset by China (Organon 10-K for fiscal 2025).

Femasys' sales of all products, including a new birth control device, were $2,293,313 in 2025 (Femasys 10-K). Its 10-K says IVF costs as much as $15,000 to $30,000 per cycle, citing a 2021 Forbes Health article (Femasys 10-K); that is a company selling a cheaper alternative relaying a magazine, not a price survey. Measured clinic prices are in what IVF costs.

Which fertility clinic networks report to the SEC?

Among the filers we read, INVO Fertility is the one that owns U.S. fertility clinics: it had four at the time of its fiscal 2025 10-K, in Wisconsin, Indiana, Alabama and Georgia (INVO Fertility 10-K). Its revenue was $6.8 million in 2025 (INVO Fertility 10-K), 98.5% of it from clinics (our calculation). It says it believes more than 80 other U.S. clinics may be suitable acquisition targets (INVO Fertility 10-K). Its 10-K also restates CDC data as about 435,000 IVF cycles at about 500 U.S. IVF centers in 2022 (INVO Fertility 10-K); CDC's own clinic counts are in the ART data section of this page.

The large private networks file little or nothing. Kindbody has filed only Form D notices of private securities sales: an amended notice in May 2023 reports $66,209,632 of equity sold in an offering that began in August 2022 (Kindbody Form D/A), and its first notice in March 2022 reports $24,609,433 sold (Kindbody Form D). Together that is $90,819,065 (our calculation); Form D gives no revenue, clinic or patient counts. We found no SEC filings by Inception Fertility (Prelude) or US Fertility in EDGAR's company index.

IntegraMed America managed fertility centers as a listed company until it was taken private in 2012. Its fiscal 2011 10-K said its 15 partner centers, with 64 locations and 101 physicians and PhD scientists, were the largest managed U.S. network and performed about 15% of U.S. IVF procedures in 2010 (IntegraMed 10-K for fiscal 2011). Shady Grove Fertility Center alone provided 17.1% of IntegraMed's 2011 revenues (IntegraMed 10-K for fiscal 2011).

How often do annual reports mention IVF and fertility benefits?

24 Form 10-K annual reports filed in 2025 contained "in vitro fertilization" or "IVF", against 4 in 2001, by our count with SEC EDGAR full-text search; from 2001 to 2025 there were 369 such filings from 100 registrants (our calculation). The yearly counts, filer names and query URLs are in our EDGAR counts file. We read every filing that used "IVF" without the full phrase and removed 5 in which IVF meant something else: intravenous therapy in a Spanish-language health plan, an oil field in Colombia, an investment product and a fund name (our calculation). None used IVF as a stock ticker.

A filing-by-filing read of the 2025 set found 13 of 24 from companies that sell fertility products, services or tests, such as Cooper, Organon, Progyny, INVO and genetic testing labs; 7 list IVF as an employee or retiree benefit, 3 mention it in a director biography (one about cattle breeding) and 1 in a lender's investment schedule (our calculation; see the contexts file).

"Fertility benefits" is a new phrase in annual reports and mostly an employer perk. No 10-K contained "fertility benefit" or "fertility benefits" before Progyny's first, filed in 2020; 36 filed in 2025 did, and 114 of the 124 filings from 2020 to 2025 list it among employee benefits (our calculation). In 2025, 33 of the 36 were employee benefit lists, from employers such as Walmart, BlackRock, Pinterest and Zoom (our calculation).

What does federal law require U.S. fertility clinics to report?

Under the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992, every assisted reproductive technology program must “annually report” its pregnancy success rates for each technique, and the embryo laboratories it uses, to the Secretary of Health and Human Services through CDC (42 U.S.C. 263a-1). The Act tells HHS to include a basic live birth rate for each technique, worked out by dividing pregnancies that end in a live birth by the number of “ovarian stimulation procedures” the program attempted, and a second rate per successful egg retrieval (42 U.S.C. 263a-1(b)).

CDC must publish the reported rates every year and, for any clinic that “failed to report”, print the clinic’s name and each missing rate (42 U.S.C. 263a-5). The Act covers treatments that include the “handling of human oocytes or embryos”, such as IVF (42 U.S.C. 263a-7), so insemination alone, which handles only sperm, falls outside it. For embryo labs, the law asked CDC to write a “model program for the certification of embryo laboratories” for the States to carry out (42 U.S.C. 263a-2); adopting it is up to each State. CDC’s published clinic figures are in the CDC ART data section of this page. A clinic’s published success rate describes its past patients, not any one reader’s chances. This section summarizes laws and rules; it is not legal advice.

What FDA rules apply to egg, sperm and embryo donors?

FDA’s donor-eligibility rule (21 CFR 1271 subpart C) requires the specimen for communicable-disease testing to be collected when cells are recovered or up to 7 days before or after (eCFR, 21 CFR 1271.80). For egg donors the specimen may be taken up to 30 days before retrieval (eCFR, 21 CFR 1271.80). Anonymous sperm donors must give a new specimen, tested again, at least 6 months after donating, and their semen stays in quarantine until that retest is complete (eCFR, 21 CFR 1271.85).

The screening and testing rules do not apply to eggs or sperm from a “sexually intimate partner” of the recipient (eCFR, 21 CFR 1271.90), which covers IVF with a couple’s own eggs and sperm but not donor eggs or donor sperm. An establishment that handles donor tissue, such as a sperm bank or donor-egg program, must register with FDA within 5 days after it begins operating (eCFR, 21 CFR 1271.21).

What did the 2025 IVF executive order and its follow-ups change?

Executive Order 14216, “Expanding Access to In Vitro Fertilization”, was signed on February 18, 2025 and asked the President’s domestic policy adviser for recommendations on IVF access and costs (Federal Register, 90 FR 10451). The order says one IVF cycle can cost “$12,000 to $25,000” (Federal Register); it gives no source for that range. On October 16, 2025 the White House announced a drug-pricing agreement with EMD Serono, a fertility drug maker, and said CMS estimates women can save up to $2,200 per cycle of fertility drugs bought through TrumpRx.gov (White House). That is an administration estimate with no published method, not a measured saving.

The same day, the Departments of Labor, HHS and the Treasury issued ACA FAQs Part 72 on fertility benefits. They say an employer can offer fertility coverage apart from its main health plan, for example through a “specified disease or illness policy” covering infertility (ACA FAQs Part 72), but that infertility-only coverage “cannot be offered as a self-funded arrangement” and still qualify (ACA FAQs Part 72). In proposed rules published May 13, 2026, the three departments would create a new kind of limited excepted benefit for fertility care, with a lifetime cap of $120,000 per participant, indexed for medical inflation (Federal Register). The proposal would apply to plan years starting on or after January 1, 2027 (Federal Register). The departments estimate that about 54.4 million people in employer plans would be offered such a benefit (Federal Register), a projection rather than a count. No final rule had been published in the Federal Register by November 8, 2026.

Do federal employee health plans cover IVF?

For 2025, OPM says all Federal Employees Health Benefits carriers must cover “three cycles of IVF-related drugs” (OPM). OPM listed 25 FEHB plans, with 45 options among them, that also cover IVF services themselves, some with cycle or dollar limits (OPM).

Which states require health insurers to cover IVF?

Several states write IVF coverage into their insurance codes; the statutes below are the ones we read. Illinois requires group policies with pregnancy benefits issued or renewed on or after January 1, 2026 to cover infertility diagnosis and treatment, IVF included (Illinois General Assembly), for people who have not had 4 completed oocyte retrievals, with more covered after a live birth (Illinois General Assembly). New York requires large group policies to cover three cycles of IVF (New York Insurance Law 3221). Connecticut has required group policies renewed on or after January 1, 2018 to cover infertility diagnosis and treatment, IVF included (Connecticut General Statutes 38a-536). Massachusetts requires policies with pregnancy benefits to cover infertility to the same extent as other pregnancy-related procedures (Massachusetts General Laws c. 175, s. 47H). Maryland lets insurers cap IVF at three attempts per live birth and a lifetime benefit of $100,000 (Maryland Insurance 15-810).

Colorado’s Building Families Act requires coverage that includes “three completed oocyte retrievals” with unlimited embryo transfers (Colorado General Assembly); as enacted in 2020 it applies to plans issued or renewed on or after January 1, 2022 (Colorado General Assembly). California’s SB 729, as chaptered in 2024, requires large and small group plans issued or renewed on or after July 1, 2025 to cover infertility and fertility services (California Legislature), with up to three completed oocyte retrievals for large group plans (California Legislature). We did not check later bills that may have moved the Colorado or California start dates. State mandates apply only to insurance sold in the state; self-funded employer plans fall under federal law (ERISA) instead.

What does Florida law say about IVF coverage, donors, surrogacy and embryos?

A 2025 Florida Senate staff analysis says the State Group Insurance Program for state employees does not cover fertility treatment meant to achieve pregnancy, “including IVF” (Florida Senate bill analysis, CS/CS/SB 924); a 2025 law added fertility preservation coverage for people facing infertility from medical treatment. The analysis speaks only to the state employee plan, and we found no Florida primary source on a statewide private-insurance mandate, so this page makes no claim either way.

Florida’s parentage chapter governs assisted reproduction. A child born within marriage and conceived by IVF or with donated eggs or embryos is “irrebuttably presumed” to be the married couple’s child when both consented in writing, except in gestational surrogacy (Florida Statutes 742.11). Egg, sperm and embryo donors give up all parental rights, and only “reasonable compensation” directly related to the donation is allowed (Florida Statutes 742.14). A gestational surrogacy contract binds only if the surrogate is 18 years of age or older and the intended parents are married and both adults (Florida Statutes 742.15). The couple and the treating physician must sign a “written agreement” on what happens to eggs, sperm and embryos after divorce or death (Florida Statutes 742.17).

What happened to IVF law in Alabama after the 2024 LePage ruling?

The Supreme Court of Alabama released its opinion in LePage v. The Center for Reproductive Medicine on February 16, 2024 (Supreme Court of Alabama). It held that the state’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies to “all unborn children”, wherever they are, including embryos frozen during IVF (Supreme Court of Alabama). The Legislature answered with SB159, passed by both houses on March 6, 2024 and effective immediately. It bars suits and prosecutions over the damage to or death of an embryo against anyone “providing or receiving services” related to IVF (Alabama Legislature), and limits damages against makers of IVF goods to the “price paid for the impacted in vitro cycle” (Alabama Legislature).

When does a patient story or testimonial video need the patient’s HIPAA authorization?

To use protected health information for marketing, a covered entity such as a fertility clinic “must obtain an authorization” from the patient, with exceptions only for face-to-face communications and promotional gifts of nominal value (eCFR, 45 CFR 164.508). HIPAA’s de-identification rule lists “Full face photographic images” among a patient’s identifiers (eCFR, 45 CFR 164.514), so a video that shows a patient’s face, or a baby announcement that names the clinic patient, is identifiable health information. Complete P.T., Pool & Land Physical Therapy, a Los Angeles-area practice, agreed in 2016 to pay HHS $25,000 after posting patient testimonials with full names and full-face photos without valid authorizations (HHS OCR). It was not a fertility clinic; it is the closest OCR case on patient testimonials.

What do FTC rules say about IVF success stories, testimonials and fake reviews?

Under the FTC’s Endorsement Guides, if an advertiser cannot show that a patient’s result is what people will generally achieve, the ad should disclose the generally expected performance (eCFR, 16 CFR 255.2), which bears on “our baby” stories in clinic videos. When an endorsement uses both pictures and sound, as a video does, the disclosure belongs in both the visual and audible portions (eCFR, 16 CFR 255.0). The FTC’s rule against fake reviews and testimonials (16 CFR Part 465) took effect on October 21, 2024 (Federal Register).

What must a Florida fertility doctor’s ad or video include?

Any Florida ad for health care services that names a practitioner must identify the type of license that person holds (Florida Statutes 456.072), which matters when clinic videos feature nurse practitioners or physician assistants. The Board of Medicine treats a physician ad as false, deceptive or misleading if it creates false or “unjustified expectations of beneficial assistance” (Florida Administrative Code 64B8-11.001), and a physician who advertises on electronic media must keep an exact copy of each audio or video ad for at least six months after it airs (Florida Administrative Code 64B8-11.001). Florida’s telehealth law covers “synchronous or asynchronous” technology (Florida Statutes 456.47), so both live video consults and store-and-forward review count as telehealth.

What do the popular fertility numbers really say?

Fertility clinic websites, patient groups, government fact sheets and marketing vendors repeat four numbers more than most: 1 in 8 couples with infertility, 1 in 6 people worldwide, a video that lifts conversions by 80%, and 12 million IVF babies. We traced each to the survey, review, registry or vendor that produced it and read what it measured. Pages that repeat a number are linked only as dated evidence of how it spread, never as a source for the number itself.

“1 in 8 couples have trouble getting pregnant or sustaining a pregnancy”

The ratio is RESOLVE’s restatement of federal survey figures about women, and the figure under it changed at least three times. RESOLVE, the national infertility patient association, said on a myths page captured in November 1996 that more than five million people of childbearing age in the United States experience infertility, naming no survey (RESOLVE, archived). Its annual report for 2007 still spoke of 7.3 million Americans with infertility (RESOLVE, archived). The earliest use of the ratio we found is its annual report for 2008, which refers to “those 1 in 8 couples” (RESOLVE, archived); we searched RESOLVE’s archived pages and the web, not print trade press or congressional hearings, so an earlier use may exist. Its fast-facts page, captured in June 2010, shows the arithmetic: infertility affects 7.3 million people in the U.S. (RESOLVE, archived), “12% of women of childbearing age, or 1 in 8 couples”, citing the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth (RESOLVE, archived). That survey, run by CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), interviews a national sample of women and men aged 15-44. NCHS’s 2013 report says an estimated 12% of women, 7.3 million, had impaired fecundity in 2002 (NCHS, archived): physical difficulty getting pregnant or carrying a pregnancy to a live birth. CDC’s FastStats page for the same survey put impaired fecundity at 11.8% of women aged 15-44 and listed the same count, 7.3 million, for women who had ever used infertility services (CDC, archived), so the number on RESOLVE’s page fits either measure. Neither counted couples, and neither is infertility as NCHS defines it.

The ratio stayed and the base moved. In the 2006-2010 survey, NCHS found 6.0% of married women aged 15-44, 1.5 million, were infertile, meaning 12 months or more without pregnancy despite unprotected sex (NCHS, archived). Impaired fecundity was 12% among married women (NCHS, archived) and 11% among all women (NCHS, archived). CDC’s own infertility page in February 2015 put the first of these as about 6% of married women unable to get pregnant after a year (CDC, archived). By October 2017 RESOLVE’s fast facts read “1 in 8 couples (or 12% of married women) have trouble getting pregnant or sustaining a pregnancy” (RESOLVE, archived), the impaired-fecundity share, beside 7.4 million women who had ever received any infertility service (RESOLVE, archived). A RESOLVE blog post of November 20, 2018 gave a third base: 12% of women aged 15-44 had ever used infertility services, “That is 1 in 8 women” (RESOLVE, archived). The same post explained the rival “1 in 6 couples” (RESOLVE, archived). It came from an NIH team: Thoma and colleagues (Fertility and Sterility, 2013) re-analysed the 2002 survey with a current duration approach, based on how long women had been trying, and estimated infertility at 15.5%, against 7.0% on the standard measure, with a 95% confidence interval of 8.6% to 27.5% (Fertility and Sterility).

Between October 31 and December 10, 2023, RESOLVE’s facts page dropped the ratio for the World Health Organization’s global figure: “1 in 6 people of reproductive age are impacted by infertility globally” (RESOLVE, archived). The 2018 post still opens with “1 in 8 couples have trouble getting pregnant or sustaining a pregnancy” in an October 2026 capture (RESOLVE, archived). The White House used two ratios in 2025 and named no source either time: as many as one in seven couples trying to have a baby are unable to conceive, on February 18 (White House), and as many as one in eight, on October 16 (White House). CDC’s infertility FAQ, captured October 2026, says 19% of married women aged 15-49 with no prior births are unable to get pregnant after a year of trying (CDC, archived) and 26% of that group have difficulty getting pregnant or carrying a pregnancy to term (CDC, archived). Those shares cover only married women who have never given birth. A different one in eight comes from KFF’s 2024 Women’s Health Survey, where 13% of women aged 18-49 said they or a partner had ever needed fertility services (see our burden section).

Use instead: “In the 2015-2019 National Survey of Family Growth, 19.4% of married U.S. women aged 15-49 with no births were infertile, and 13.4% of all women aged 15-49 had impaired fecundity (CDC/NCHS).” Name the group and the survey years, and do not turn a share of women into a share of couples.

“1 in 6 people worldwide are affected by infertility”

The figure is WHO’s pooled estimate of lifetime infertility from 133 existing studies, and it counts anyone who has ever gone 12 months or more without a pregnancy despite regular unprotected sex. WHO’s news release of April 4, 2023 said around 17.5% of the adult population, roughly 1 in 6 worldwide, experience infertility (WHO). A search of 12,241 records led to 133 studies with data from 1990 to 2021 (WHO), from which 91 data points were pooled (WHO report). The most common design was a one-time cross-sectional survey, 86% of the studies (WHO report). The report’s own headline is that approximately one in six people have experienced infertility at some stage in their lives, globally (WHO report). That is the lifetime estimate, 17.5%; the period estimate, the share with infertility at a given time, is 12.6%, and the Americas’ lifetime estimate, pooled from 10 studies, is 20.0% (see our burden section).

The wording has since drifted from “adult population” to an age group. WHO’s own fact sheet of November 28, 2025 says approximately one in every six people of reproductive age worldwide experience infertility in their lifetime (WHO), and RESOLVE’s page says 1 in 6 people of reproductive age are impacted. The estimate is the same 2023 lifetime figure in both; it is not a yearly rate, not a U.S. figure and not a share of couples.

Use instead: “WHO estimates that 17.5% of adults worldwide have experienced infertility in their lifetime, pooled from 133 studies with data from 1990 to 2021 (WHO, 2023).” For U.S. readers, use the National Survey of Family Growth figures above.

“Video on a landing page lifts conversions by 80%”

The figure is a best case from one video vendor, EyeView, in 2009-2010, about financial and tutoring websites, not healthcare. EyeView’s blog first reported that eToro visitors who watched its video were 20% more likely to download the product (December 2008) (EyeView, archived). In February 2009 it said UMOO viewers were 80% more likely to become depositing users, comparing viewers with non-viewers for one client (EyeView, archived), and in November 2009 it quoted a TutorVista manager on a first test that lifted conversion by over 80 percent (EyeView, archived). Its 2010 white paper said only that “in some cases” the boost was over 80% (EyeView white paper, archived), and the one test it described, the eToro split test, was now almost 32 percent (EyeView white paper, archived).

The scope fell away in repeats. By August 2010 Unbounce, a landing-page software seller, wrote that video on landing pages can increase conversion by 80% (Unbounce, archived), and WordStream, a pay-per-click software seller, repeated 80% in March 2016, crediting “EyeWideDigital” (WordStream). Healthcare marketing carried it on: Nucleus Medical Media, which makes medical animation and patient-education video, listed 80% in 2018, credited to Eyeview Digital (Nucleus Medical Media), and Practice Builders, which markets medical and dental practices, wrote 80 percent in a 2018 white paper, crediting a different video producer (Practice Builders). We searched fertility and IVF marketing pages for the figure and found no fertility clinic test behind it.

The larger later evidence points the other way. Unbounce’s own 2021 analysis of about 35,000 customer landing pages in each of three periods (Unbounce) concluded that video appears to have a minimal or negative impact on landing-page performance regardless of the conversion goal (Unbounce). Use instead: do not cite a conversion lift for fertility clinic video; say Unbounce’s 2021 study of 35,000 pages found video had a minimal or negative effect, and judge a clinic’s video by its own consultation requests.

“More than 12 million babies have been born through IVF”

The number is a running estimate from the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ICMART), built from national and regional registry data that lag years behind, plus projections. Each round number since 2012 restates the same method with newer data. The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) announced on July 1, 2012 that births after assisted reproduction had reached an estimated total of 5 million since Louise Brown was born in July 1978 (ESHRE, via EurekAlert). The figure used cycles recorded worldwide up to 2008 with estimates added for three more years, and had been put at 4.6 million the year before (ESHRE, via EurekAlert). ESHRE’s June 2014 fact sheet still said more than 5 million (ESHRE). On July 3, 2018 ESHRE quoted ICMART’s David Adamson: over 8 Million babies (ESHRE), calculated from regional registry data from 1991 to 2014 (ESHRE).

In July 2023 Adamson told ESHRE there have been at least 12 million IVF babies since 1978 (Planer, reprinting ESHRE). He described it as ICMART’s complete delivery data up to 2018, around 10 million babies, plus an estimated 750,000 IVF births a year since then (Planer, reprinting ESHRE). We could not find that interview on ESHRE’s own site; the copy we cite is a lab equipment maker’s reprint. ESHRE’s own ART fact sheet of June 2025 still headlines “+10 MILLION” babies born since 1978 (ESHRE).

A published count came in 2025. Adamson and colleagues for ICMART (Fertility and Sterility, 2025) put births after assisted reproduction from 1978 through 2018 at between 9.8 million (9,829,668) (Fertility and Sterility) and 13.0 million (13,019,331) (Fertility and Sterility). The gap between the two is the estimate for clinics and countries that do not report. UNSW Sydney, home of the paper’s data unit, quoted co-author Georgina Chambers saying preliminary later data bring the total in 2024 to 13–17 million infants (UNSW).

Use instead: “ICMART estimates that 9.8 million to 13.0 million babies were born after assisted reproduction worldwide from 1978 to 2018 (Adamson et al., Fertility and Sterility, 2025).” Call any later total a projection.

Every popular claim our research pages trace, 853 in all, is on one page: popular video statistics, fact-checked.

How we built this page

We started from the questions people search for about fertility clinic video statistics and looked for the organization that actually produced each answer. Every figure on this page sits in an evidence ledger with its source, the exact table or paragraph it came from, the measurement period, the population measured, and the date we checked it. This edition holds 590 figures from 74 publishers.

On November 8, 2026, each sourced figure on this page was re-fetched with the fetch cache cleared and matched against the recorded wording: CDC’s National ART Surveillance System files through the data.cdc.gov data API, and CDC and NCHS pages and reports (through Internet Archive copies, because cdc.gov refuses automated requests); BLS occupation wage estimates and the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (through the BLS data API and data files) and Employment Projections pages (Internet Archive copies); Census County Business Patterns, the 2022 Economic Census and the Annual Integrated Economic Survey (through the Census data API); WHO, KFF, Pew Research Center, Gallup, Mercer, the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans and the California Health Benefits Review Program; clinic and network pages; the U.S. Code on govinfo, eCFR, the Federal Register, OPM, the White House, state legislature statute pages, the 2026 Florida Statutes and the Board of Medicine’s advertising rule, and the Supreme Court of Alabama’s opinion; SEC filings on EDGAR; journal abstracts (PubMed abstracts re-read through NCBI’s E-utilities, because the pages answer scripts with a bot check); and the pages behind each popular claim. Our clinic counts come from CDC’s own files, our YouTube figures from the YouTube Data API and our filing counts from EDGAR full-text search. We left out JAMA Network pages and congress.gov (robots rules that bar AI agents), ftc.gov pages (they answer scripts with an error page, so FTC rules are cited from eCFR and the Federal Register), the Business Group on Health (its robots file refuses requests), clinic prices that load only in a browser, and state mandate statutes we could not read at their source (New Jersey, Delaware, Utah and Texas).

We only cite the producer: government agencies, regulators, company filings and official posts, and the survey owner's own report. We do not cite statistics roundups, Statista-style aggregators, or salary sites without a public method. We did not bypass paywalls or sign-up forms; where a full report was gated, we used only the figures its publisher states publicly.

Figures marked "our calculation" are arithmetic on the cited numbers, and anyone can reproduce them:

This edition contains no Mark Studios customer data.

Limitations

• CDC counts clinics that report, and the newest final year is 2022. 457 clinics reported 2022 cycles; CDC lists 54 more that did not and says its system holds about 98% of U.S. cycles. No 2023 file was published when we checked.
• A clinic’s success rate is not anyone’s chance. CDC’s rates are averages over a clinic’s patients, who differ in age, diagnosis and treatment from clinic to clinic. We report them only as published.
• There is no job code for fertility doctors. BLS counts reproductive endocrinologists among all obstetricians and gynecologists (SOC 29-1218), and Census counts fertility clinics inside family planning centers (NAICS 621410) or offices of physicians (NAICS 621111). Every such figure is labelled.
• Infertility is measured in different ways. NSFG measures infertility among married or cohabiting women and impaired fecundity among all women 15-49; WHO pools lifetime and period prevalence from studies around the world; KFF asks women whether they ever needed fertility services. We print them side by side.
• Our YouTube read follows YouTube’s ranking. The 565 videos are what YouTube’s search returned for ‘IVF’, ‘fertility clinic’ and ‘egg freezing’ (the top 200 results of each, sorted by views, with no country filter) on November 8, 2026. It is not a census of fertility video, view counts are lifetime snapshots, and we sorted 352 channels by hand from their public text without checking credentials. We do not name patients.
• Study results come from specific settings. Each content study sampled the top results for one topic on one date and defined “physician” its own way; most education trials were small and run in one or two clinics; several telehealth figures come from 2020.
• Seller and association figures are their own. Mercer sells benefits consulting, Carrot, Maven and Progyny sell fertility benefits, clinic networks publish their own sizes and list prices, and drug and device makers’ 10-K figures come from their own market research. Each is labelled, and one clinic’s list price is not a national average.

How to cite this page

For a single figure, cite the original publisher named next to it, and link here if the verification trail is useful to your readers. Each figure has its own anchor, so you can link straight to it, for example https://www.markstudios.com/research/fertility-clinic-video-statistics#ART-016. To cite the page as a whole:

Mark Studios. "Fertility Clinic Video Statistics." Last verified Nov 8, 2026. https://www.markstudios.com/research/fertility-clinic-video-statistics

@misc{markstudios_fertility_clinic_video_statistics_2026,
  author = {{Mark Studios}},
  title = {{Fertility Clinic Video Statistics}},
  year = {2026},
  month = nov,
  url = {https://www.markstudios.com/research/fertility-clinic-video-statistics},
  note = {Last verified 2026-11-08}
}

Our calculations and the evidence table are free to reuse with attribution and a link to this page. Each underlying figure remains the claim of its original publisher, and some publishers ask for a link when their figures are reused.

Sources

Download the evidence table (CSV)

1. Journal of Medical Internet Research (Kelly-Hedrick et al.), "It's Totally Okay to Be Sad, but Never Lose Hope": Content Analysis of Infertility-Related Videos on YouTube in Relation to Viewer Preferences. (2018-05-23). Accessed 2026-11-08.
2. International Journal of Impotence Research (Ku et al.), A systematic evaluation of youtube as an information source for male infertility. (2020-06-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
3. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology (Çintesun et al.), YouTube as a source of information on gonadotropin self-injections. (2021-07-13). Accessed 2026-11-08.
4. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association (Dogan et al.), Reliability and accuracy of varicocoele videos in YouTube. (2022-12-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
5. Indian Journal of Urology (Hong et al.), Assessing information on YouTube™ as a quality source for the treatment of varicoceles. (2021-10-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
6. Urology (Siegal et al.), The Assessment of TikTok as a Source of Quality Health Information on Varicoceles. (2022-12-24). Accessed 2026-11-08.
7. Cureus (Atigan & Atigan), Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and Exercise: Evaluation of YouTube Videos. (2023-02-17). Accessed 2026-11-08.
8. Cureus (Clarke et al.), Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS): A Cross-Sectional Observational Study Analyzing the Quality of Content on YouTube. (2023-09-16). Accessed 2026-11-08.
9. Reproductive BioMedicine Online (Peipert et al.), The #IVF journey: content analysis of IVF videos on TikTok. (2023-08-28). Accessed 2026-11-08.
10. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Herweck et al.), Oocyte cryopreservation on TikTok and Instagram: Who is teaching whom? (2024-04-13). Accessed 2026-11-08.
11. Healthcare (Horvath et al.), The Discourse Surrounding Polycystic Ovary Syndrome on TikTok: A Social Media Analysis. (2024-11-12). Accessed 2026-11-08.
12. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics (Riemma et al.), Assessing quality, reliability and accuracy of polycystic ovary syndrome-related content on TikTok: A video-based cross-sectional analysis. (2025-02-10). Accessed 2026-11-08.
13. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Daram et al.), Lost in translation: are doctors really answering patients' questions about in vitro fertilization? (2025-06-13). Accessed 2026-11-08.
14. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Hammarberg et al.), Information about elective egg freezing on instagram reels: a content review. (2025-10-21). Accessed 2026-11-08.
15. Reproductive BioMedicine Online (Jacobsen et al.), A quantitative analysis of TikTok content on fertility and assisted reproductive technology. (2025-12-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
16. BMC Public Health (Zhang et al.), Evaluation of the quality and reliability of infertility information on Chinese social media platforms Bilibili and TikTok : a cross-sectional study. (2026-07-02). Accessed 2026-11-08.
17. Gynecology and Pelvic Medicine (Labroo et al.), A TikTok take on polycystic ovarian syndrome: a cross-sectional study. (2026-09-03). Accessed 2026-11-08.
18. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology (Naroji et al.), Understanding PCOS-Related Content across Social Media Platforms-A Cross-Sectional Analysis. (2023-11-20). Accessed 2026-11-08.
19. Fertility Research and Practice (Peyser et al.), Fertility education: what's trending on Instagram. (2021-01-18). Accessed 2026-11-08.
20. Human Fertility (Dhanoya et al.), #misinformation: The perils of using social media for medical advice regarding infertility. (2025-05-21). Accessed 2026-11-08.
21. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Blakemore et al.), Infertility influencers: an analysis of information and influence in the fertility webspace. (2020-05-07). Accessed 2026-11-08.
22. Journal of Medical Internet Research (Brochu et al.), Searching the Internet for Infertility Information: A Survey of Patient Needs and Preferences. (2019-12-12). Accessed 2026-11-08.
23. Fertility and Sterility (Weissman et al.), Use of the internet by infertile couples. (2000-06-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
24. Social Science & Medicine (Slauson-Blevins et al.), Online and in-person health-seeking for infertility. (2013-10-31). Accessed 2026-11-08.
25. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Sandhu et al.), Information and decision support needs: A survey of women interested in receiving planned oocyte cryopreservation information. (2023-04-14). Accessed 2026-11-08.
26. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Broughton et al.), Social media in the REI clinic: what do patients want? (2018-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
27. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Walker et al.), Social media's impact on patient provider choice. (2024-01-17). Accessed 2026-11-08.
28. F&S Reports (Allen et al.), Cross-sectional analysis of online patient reviews of infertility care providers. (2020-07-25). Accessed 2026-11-08.
29. Fertility Research and Practice (Gunderson et al.), Public reporting of IVF outcomes influences medical decision-making and physician training. (2020-02-11). Accessed 2026-11-08.
30. Fertility and Sterility (Sauerbrun-Cutler et al.), Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology advertising guidelines: How are member clinics doing? (2020-10-14). Accessed 2026-11-08.
31. npj Digital Medicine (Adeleye et al.), Learning from Online Video Education (LOVE) improves confidence in fertility treatments: a randomized controlled trial. (2022-08-29). Accessed 2026-11-08.
32. Journal of the Turkish-German Gynecological Association (Erkılınç et al.), The effect of a pre-procedure information video on anxiety levels in patients undergoing hysterosalpingography: A prospective case-control study. (2018-01-24). Accessed 2026-11-08.
33. F&S Reports (Bernard et al.), The impact of an interactive multimedia educational platform on patient comprehension and anxiety during fertility treatment: a randomized controlled trial. (2022-05-22). Accessed 2026-11-08.
34. Human Reproduction (Sandhu et al.), Eggsurance? A randomized controlled trial of a decision aid for elective egg freezing. (2024-08-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
35. Human Reproduction (Dias et al.), A video clip detailing the patient journey on the day of oocyte retrieval in addition to the standard of care: a randomized controlled trial. (2025-04-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
36. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Dilday et al.), Telehealth provider experience in reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. (2022-06-22). Accessed 2026-11-08.
37. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (Lersten et al.), Patient perspectives of telehealth for fertility care: a national survey. (2023-04-28). Accessed 2026-11-08.
38. Reproductive BioMedicine Online (Kim et al.), Patient satisfaction with telemedicine and in-person visits in reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinics. (2023-07-16). Accessed 2026-11-08.
39. Reproductive BioMedicine Online (Tran et al.), The impacts of telemedicine on assisted reproduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2023-11-29). Accessed 2026-11-08.
40. Fertility and Sterility (Tewari et al.), Racial disparities in telehealth use during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. (2023-05-25). Accessed 2026-11-08.
41. Fertility and Sterility (Grens et al.), Online fertility workup with video consultation for infertility patients; a randomized controlled trial. (2025-04-24). Accessed 2026-11-08.
42. KFF, 2026 Employer Health Benefits Survey (2026-10-22). Accessed 2026-11-08.
43. KFF, 2024 Employer Health Benefits Survey (2024-10-09). Accessed 2026-11-08.
44. Mercer (benefits consultant), Delivering efficient and affordable IVF coverage to employees (2025-03-06). Accessed 2026-11-08.
45. Mercer (benefits consultant), for RESOLVE, 2021 Survey on Fertility Benefits (2021-05-04). Accessed 2026-11-08.
46. International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans, Organizations Adding More Fertility and Adoption Support (press release) (2024-08-22). Accessed 2026-11-08.
47. Maven Clinic (fertility and family benefits vendor), State of Women's and Family Health Benefits 2026 (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
48. Carrot Fertility (fertility benefits vendor), First-of-its-kind Global Fertility at Work Report from Carrot Fertility (press release) (2023-04-18). Accessed 2026-11-08.
49. California Health Benefits Review Program (University of California), Abbreviated Analysis: California Senate Bill 729 Treatment for Infertility and Fertility Services (2023-04-18). Accessed 2026-11-08.
50. Mercer (benefits consultant), Fertility treatments: Standalone benefit options and TrumpRx (2025-10-30). Accessed 2026-11-08.
51. CNY Fertility, What Does IVF Cost? (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
52. CNY Fertility, How Much Does It Cost to Freeze Your Eggs? A Complete Guide (2026-07-07). Accessed 2026-11-08.
53. Shady Grove Fertility (US Fertility network), Egg Freezing Costs (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
54. Kindbody, Services & Pricing (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
55. US Fertility, About | US Fertility (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
56. Shady Grove Fertility, Shady Grove Fertility home page (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
57. Everleap Fertility (IVI-RMA / IVI Institute), About Us | Everleap Fertility (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
58. Pinnacle Fertility, About Pinnacle Fertility (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
59. Ivy Fertility, About | Ivy Fertility (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
60. Inception Fertility, Inception Fertility home page (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
61. IVF Florida Reproductive Associates (US Fertility network), IVF FLORIDA Reproductive Associates (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
62. CNY Fertility, CNY Fertility Hollywood (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
63. Shady Grove Fertility (US Fertility network), Florida locations | Shady Grove Fertility (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
64. CCRM Fertility, IVF & Fertility Clinics in Florida | CCRM Fertility (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
65. Kindbody, Kindbody Locations (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
66. Pinnacle Fertility, Find a Pinnacle Fertility Clinic (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
67. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
68. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
69. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National ART Surveillance System (2024-12-10). Accessed 2026-11-08.
70. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2024-12-09). Accessed 2026-11-08.
71. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2023-06-23). Accessed 2026-11-08.
72. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
73. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
74. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, ART Surveillance (2024-12-10). Accessed 2026-11-08.
75. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2023-06-23). Accessed 2026-11-08.
76. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2024-12-09). Accessed 2026-11-08.
77. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Summary (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
78. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Summary (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
79. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Patient and Cycle Characteristics (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
80. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Summary (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
81. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Summary (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
82. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Summary (2023-07-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
83. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020 Final Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Services and Profiles (2023-06-23). Accessed 2026-11-08.
84. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, State-Specific ART Surveillance dashboard data (state-specific-dashboard.json) (2024-10-09). Accessed 2026-11-08.
85. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Outlook Handbook: Physicians and Surgeons (2026-08-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
86. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
87. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
88. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Projections Table 1.2: Occupational projections, 2025-35, and worker characteristics, 2025 (2026-08-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
89. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
90. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
91. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
92. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
93. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
94. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
95. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
96. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
97. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
98. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
99. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
100. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS), May 2025 estimates (2026-05-15). Accessed 2026-11-08.
101. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, QCEW open data, 2025 annual averages, industry 621410 (2026-09-03). Accessed 2026-11-08.
102. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, QCEW open data, 2019 annual averages, industry 621410 (2020-09-02). Accessed 2026-11-08.
103. U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns 2023 (Census Data API, cbp) (2025-06-26). Accessed 2026-11-08.
104. U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 Economic Census: Selected Statistics by Industry (ecnbasic) (2025-01-23). Accessed 2026-11-08.
105. U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 Economic Census: Telemedicine Services by Industry (ecntelemeds) (2025-01-23). Accessed 2026-11-08.
106. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, QCEW open data, 2025 annual averages, industry 621111 (2026-09-03). Accessed 2026-11-08.
107. U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Integrated Economic Survey: Detailed Operating Expenses: 2024 (aiesexp02) (2026-05-28). Accessed 2026-11-08.
108. National Center for Health Statistics (CDC), Key Statistics from the National Survey of Family Growth - I Listing (2022-12-16). Accessed 2026-11-08.
109. National Center for Health Statistics (CDC), Infertility and Impaired Fecundity in Women and Men in the United States, 2015-2019 (National Health Statistics Reports No. 202) (2024-04-24). Accessed 2026-11-08.
110. World Health Organization, Infertility prevalence estimates, 1990-2021 (2023-04-04). Accessed 2026-11-08.
111. World Health Organization, 1 in 6 people globally affected by infertility: WHO (news release) (2023-04-04). Accessed 2026-11-08.
112. National Center for Health Statistics (CDC), Use of Fertility Services in Women Ages 20-49 in the United States: 2022-2023 (NCHS Data Brief No. 542) (2025-12). Accessed 2026-11-08.
113. National Center for Health Statistics (CDC), Endometriosis, Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, and Uterine Fibroids in Women Ages 20-49: United States, 2022-2023 (NCHS Health E-Stat 121) (2026-07). Accessed 2026-11-08.
114. KFF, Women's Access to Fertility Care: Findings from the 2026 KFF Women's Health Survey (2026-10-08). Accessed 2026-11-08.
115. KFF, Access to Fertility Care: Findings from the 2024 KFF Women's Health Survey (2024-10-21). Accessed 2026-11-08.
116. National Center for Health Statistics (CDC), Births: Final Data for 2024 (National Vital Statistics Reports Vol. 75, No. 2) (2026-06-09). Accessed 2026-11-08.
117. National Center for Health Statistics (CDC), Births: Provisional Data for 2025 (Vital Statistics Rapid Release Report No. 43) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-08.
118. National Center for Health Statistics (CDC), A Decade of Changes in State Fertility Rates for Women Age 30 and Older: United States, 2015-2024 (NCHS Data Brief No. 556) (2026-04). Accessed 2026-11-08.
119. Pew Research Center, A growing share of Americans say they've had fertility treatments or know someone who has (2023-09-14). Accessed 2026-11-08.
120. Pew Research Center, Americans overwhelmingly say access to IVF is a good thing (2024-05-13). Accessed 2026-11-08.
121. Gallup, Americans Back IVF; Divide on Morality of Destroying Embryos (2024-06-13). Accessed 2026-11-08.
122. INVO Fertility, Inc., INVO Fertility, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2025 (2026-06-02). Accessed 2026-11-08.
123. Femasys Inc., Femasys Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2025 (2026-03-31). Accessed 2026-11-08.
124. Progyny, Inc., Progyny, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2025 (2026-02-27). Accessed 2026-11-08.
125. IntegraMed America, Inc., IntegraMed America, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2001 (2002-04-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
126. IntegraMed America, Inc., IntegraMed America, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2011 (its last annual report) (2012-03-06). Accessed 2026-11-08.
127. Progyny, Inc., Progyny, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2019 (2020-03-10). Accessed 2026-11-08.
128. Progyny, Inc., Progyny, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2021 (2022-03-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
129. Progyny, Inc., Progyny, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2023 (2024-02-29). Accessed 2026-11-08.
130. The Cooper Companies, Inc., The Cooper Companies, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2025 (2025-12-05). Accessed 2026-11-08.
131. The Cooper Companies, Inc., The Cooper Companies, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2015 (2015-12-18). Accessed 2026-11-08.
132. The Cooper Companies, Inc., The Cooper Companies, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2019 (2019-12-20). Accessed 2026-11-08.
133. The Cooper Companies, Inc., The Cooper Companies, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2021 (2021-12-10). Accessed 2026-11-08.
134. The Cooper Companies, Inc., The Cooper Companies, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2023 (2023-12-08). Accessed 2026-11-08.
135. Organon & Co., Organon & Co. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2025 (2026-02-24). Accessed 2026-11-08.
136. Kindbody, Inc., Kindbody, Inc. Form D/A (notice of exempt offering of securities) (2023-05-04). Accessed 2026-11-08.
137. Kindbody, Inc., Kindbody, Inc. Form D (notice of exempt offering of securities) (2022-03-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
138. Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (via govinfo, U.S. Government Publishing Office), 42 U.S.C. 263a-1 -- Assisted reproductive technology programs (United States Code, 2024 Edition) (2024). Accessed 2026-11-08.
139. Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (via govinfo, U.S. Government Publishing Office), 42 U.S.C. 263a-5 -- Publication (United States Code, 2024 Edition) (2024). Accessed 2026-11-08.
140. Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (via govinfo, U.S. Government Publishing Office), 42 U.S.C. 263a-7 -- Definitions (United States Code, 2024 Edition) (2024). Accessed 2026-11-08.
141. Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (via govinfo, U.S. Government Publishing Office), 42 U.S.C. 263a-2 -- Certification of embryo laboratories (United States Code, 2024 Edition) (2024). Accessed 2026-11-08.
142. Food and Drug Administration (rule text via eCFR, Office of the Federal Register), 21 CFR Part 1271 Subpart C -- Donor Eligibility (2026-11-08). Accessed 2026-11-08.
143. Food and Drug Administration (rule text via eCFR, Office of the Federal Register), 21 CFR Part 1271 Subpart B -- Procedures for Registration and Listing (2026-11-08). Accessed 2026-11-08.
144. Executive Office of the President (Federal Register), Expanding Access to In Vitro Fertilization (Executive Order 14216, 90 FR 10451) (2025-02-24). Accessed 2026-11-08.
145. The White House, Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Announces Actions to Lower Costs and Expand Access to In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) and High-Quality Fertility Care (2025-10-16). Accessed 2026-11-08.
146. U.S. Departments of Labor, HHS and the Treasury, FAQs about Affordable Care Act Implementation Part 72 (2025-10-16). Accessed 2026-11-08.
147. Departments of the Treasury, Labor and HHS (Federal Register), Excepted Fertility Benefits (proposed rules, Federal Register 2026-09479) (2026-05-13). Accessed 2026-11-08.
148. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 2025 FEHB IVF Information (2024). Accessed 2026-11-08.
149. Illinois General Assembly, 215 ILCS 5/356m Infertility coverage (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
150. New York State Senate (New York Insurance Law), New York Insurance Law Section 3221 (2025). Accessed 2026-11-08.
151. Connecticut General Assembly, Connecticut General Statutes Sec. 38a-536 (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
152. The General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, General Laws Part I, Title XXII, Chapter 175, Section 47H (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
153. Maryland General Assembly, Maryland Code, Insurance § 15-810 (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
154. Colorado General Assembly, House Bill 20-1158 (signed act), 'Colorado Building Families Act' (2020). Accessed 2026-11-08.
155. California Legislature, SB-729 Health care coverage: treatment for infertility and fertility services (bill text) (2024). Accessed 2026-11-08.
156. The Florida Senate (Committee on Appropriations staff analysis, CS/CS/SB 924), Bill Analysis and Fiscal Impact Statement, CS/CS/SB 924 (2025) (2025-04). Accessed 2026-11-08.
157. The Florida Legislature, The 2026 Florida Statutes, Chapter 742 Determination of Parentage (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
158. Supreme Court of Alabama (Alabama Appellate Courts public portal), LePage v. The Center for Reproductive Medicine, P.C., SC-2022-0515 and SC-2022-0579 (opinion) (2024-02-16). Accessed 2026-11-08.
159. Alabama Legislature, SB159 Enrolled (2024 Regular Session) (2024-03-06). Accessed 2026-11-08.
160. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (rule text via eCFR, Office of the Federal Register), 45 CFR 164.508 -- Uses and disclosures for which an authorization is required (2026-11-08). Accessed 2026-11-08.
161. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (rule text via eCFR, Office of the Federal Register), 45 CFR 164.514 -- Other requirements relating to uses and disclosures of protected health information (2026-11-08). Accessed 2026-11-08.
162. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, Physical therapy provider settles violations that it impermissibly disclosed patient information (2016-02-12). Accessed 2026-11-08.
163. Federal Trade Commission (rule text via eCFR, Office of the Federal Register), 16 CFR Part 255 -- Guides Concerning Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising (2023-07-26). Accessed 2026-11-08.
164. Federal Trade Commission (Federal Register), Trade Regulation Rule on the Use of Consumer Reviews and Testimonials (Federal Register, 2024-08-22) (2024-08-22). Accessed 2026-11-08.
165. The Florida Legislature, The 2026 Florida Statutes, 456.072 Grounds for discipline; penalties; enforcement (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
166. Florida Department of State (Florida Administrative Code), Board of Medicine rule, 64B8-11.001 Advertising (rule text) (2026-03-19). Accessed 2026-11-08.
167. The Florida Legislature, The 2026 Florida Statutes, 456.47 Use of telehealth to provide services (2026). Accessed 2026-11-08.
168. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association (patient advocacy group; corporate sponsors include fertility drug makers and clinics), Infertility Myths and Facts (1996-11-13). Accessed 2026-11-08.
169. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association (patient advocacy group; corporate sponsors include fertility drug makers and clinics), Annual Report 2007 (undated). Accessed 2026-11-08.
170. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association (patient advocacy group; corporate sponsors include fertility drug makers and clinics), 2008 Annual Report: Destination Family (undated). Accessed 2026-11-08.
171. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association (patient advocacy group; corporate sponsors include fertility drug makers and clinics), Fast Facts About Infertility (2010-06-07). Accessed 2026-11-08.
172. CDC National Center for Health Statistics (Chandra, Copen and Stephen), Infertility and Impaired Fecundity in the United States, 1982-2010: Data From the National Survey of Family Growth (National Health Statistics Reports No. 67) (2013-08-14). Accessed 2026-11-08.
173. National Center for Health Statistics (CDC), FastStats: Infertility (undated). Accessed 2026-11-08.
174. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Division of Reproductive Health), Infertility FAQs (2015-02-11). Accessed 2026-11-08.
175. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association (patient advocacy group; corporate sponsors include fertility drug makers and clinics), Fast Facts (2017-10-03). Accessed 2026-11-08.
176. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association (patient advocacy group; corporate sponsors include fertility drug makers and clinics), How Many People Have Infertility? (2018-11-20). Accessed 2026-11-08.
177. Fertility and Sterility (Thoma et al., NICHD, National Institutes of Health), Prevalence of infertility in the United States as estimated by the current duration approach and a traditional constructed approach (2013-01-03). Accessed 2026-11-08.
178. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association (patient advocacy group; corporate sponsors include fertility drug makers and clinics), Infertility 101: Facts, Diagnosis and Risk Factors (2023-12-10). Accessed 2026-11-08.
179. The White House, Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Expands Access to In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) (2025-02-18). Accessed 2026-11-08.
180. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Division of Reproductive Health), Infertility FAQs (2026-10-29). Accessed 2026-11-08.
181. World Health Organization, Infertility (fact sheet) (2025-11-28). Accessed 2026-11-08.
182. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), EyeView - The new "Conversion" game (2008-12-04). Accessed 2026-11-08.
183. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), UMOO - a prime beef example of EyeView's success (2009-02-10). Accessed 2026-11-08.
184. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), Another video conversion success story (2009-11-10). Accessed 2026-11-08.
185. EyeView Digital (video production and testing vendor; sold the videos it tested), Making Video Accountable (EyeView white paper) (2010). Accessed 2026-11-08.
186. Unbounce (landing-page software seller), The benefits of using video on landing pages (2010-08). Accessed 2026-11-08.
187. WordStream (PPC advertising software seller), 6 Ways to Use Video to Increase Conversion Rates (2016-03-30). Accessed 2026-11-08.
188. Nucleus Medical Media (healthcare video producer; sells the videos it describes), Current Trends: Healthcare Video Usage on the Web (2018-03-13). Accessed 2026-11-08.
189. Practice Builders (marketing firm selling to medical and dental practices), Video Marketing white paper (2018-03-03). Accessed 2026-11-08.
190. Unbounce (landing-page software seller; analysis of its own customers' pages), Video on landing pages means more conversions, right? Wrong. Here's why (2021-08-26). Accessed 2026-11-08.
191. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (via EurekAlert), The world's number of IVF and ICSI babies has now reached a calculated total of 5 million (2012-07-01). Accessed 2026-11-08.
192. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, ART fact sheet (June 2014) (2014-06-20). Accessed 2026-11-08.
193. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, More than 8 million babies born from IVF since the world's first in 1978 (2018-07-03). Accessed 2026-11-08.
194. Planer plc (embryology lab equipment maker), reprinting an ESHRE interview, At least 12 Million Babies Since the First IVF Birth (2023-07-31). Accessed 2026-11-08.
195. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, ART fact sheet (v10, 2025) (2025-06). Accessed 2026-11-08.
196. Fertility and Sterility (Adamson et al., ICMART), How many infants have been born with the help of assisted reproductive technology? (2025-02-11). Accessed 2026-11-08.
197. UNSW Sydney (home of the paper's data custodian, NPESU), Total IVF births soar to more than 13 million (2025-07). Accessed 2026-11-08.

Update policy and change log

We re-verify every figure quarterly and when a major source publishes a new edition. The next scheduled review is February 2027. Corrections go to contact@markstudios.com.

• Nov 8, 2026: First published with 590 figures from 74 publishers, each checked against its original source.
• Nov 9, 2026: Removed the YouTube channel and video IDs, links and video titles of patients’ personal-story channels from the public data files; those rows now carry neutral labels (patient-ch-01, patient-v-01 and so on), so every count and total still adds up. The notes on those rows no longer name the person or quote a video title.