Definition and prevalence of subfertility and infertility
Abstract
A common definition of sub- and infertility is very important for the appropriate management of infertility. Subfertility generally describes any form of reduced fertility with prolonged time of unwanted non-conception. Infertility may be used synonymously with sterility with only sporadically occurring spontaneous pregnancies. The major factor affecting the individual spontaneous pregnancy prospect is the time of unwanted non-conception which determines the grading of subfertility. Most of the pregnancies occur in the first six cycles with intercourse in the fertile phase (80%). After that, serious subfertility must be assumed in every second couple (10%) although--after 12 unsuccessful cycles--untreated live birth rates among them will reach nearly 55% in the next 36 months. Thereafter (48 months), approximately 5% of the couples are definitive infertile with a nearly zero chance of becoming spontaneously pregnant in the future. With age, cumulative probabilities of conception decline because heterogeneity in fecundity increases due to a higher proportion of infertile couples. In truly fertile couples cumulative probabilities of conception are probably age independent. Under appropriate circumstances a basic infertility work-up after six unsuccessful cycles with fertility-focused intercourse will identify couples with significant infertility problems to avoid both infertility under- and over-treatment, regardless of age: Couples with a reasonably good prognosis (e.g. unexplained infertility) may be encouraged to wait because even with treatment they do not have a better chance of conceiving. The others may benefit from an early resort to assisted reproduction treatment.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Different categories of infertility definitions (clinical, epidemiological, demographic) in conjunction with variations in methodology and study populations give rise to wide-ranging estimates.
“Different categories of infertility definitions (clinical, epidemiological, demographic) in conjunction with variations in methodology and study populations give rise to wide-ranging estimates (Gnoth et al., 2005; Barratt et al., 2017; Cox et al., 2022; World Health Organization, 2023).”
From Declining global fertility rates and the implications for family planning and family building: an IFFS consensus document based on a narrative review of the literature (2024) · cites this paper as Gnoth et al., 2005
The Introduction (page unavailable) says that definitions of subfertility and its prevalence interact, and the Time to pregnancy section explains how study design and exclusion of infertile couples affect estimates. The paper does not set out the claimed clinical, epidemiological and demographic categories of infertility definitions or explicitly attribute a wide range of estimates to variation in study populations. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe definition of infertility and its prevalence and burden of disease are controversial.
“The definition of infertility and its prevalence and burden of disease are controversial.”
From Declining global fertility rates and the implications for family planning and family building: an IFFS consensus document based on a narrative review of the literature (2024) · cites this paper as Gnoth et al., 2005
The Introduction (page unavailable) describes infertility terminology as confusing and discusses how definitions affect prevalence estimates, supporting those parts of the claim. The paper discusses risks and costs of treatment, but does not say that infertility’s burden of disease is controversial. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 603
- Authors
- Gnoth, C., Godehardt, E., Frank-Herrmann, P., Friol, K., Tigges, J., & Freundl, G.
- Affiliations
- Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Gnoth, C.
- ORCID
- Gnoth, C.
- Venue
- Human Reproduction
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-05-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1144-1147
- ISSN
- 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2350
- OpenAlex
- W2129749274
- Cited by
- 603
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 1.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
- Keywords
- subfertility, infertility, time to conception, spontaneous conception, live birth rate, age-related fertility decline, infertility workup, unexplained infertility
- MeSH terms
- Age Factors, Birth Rate, Female, Humans, Infertility, Infertility, Female, Male, Pregnancy, Prevalence
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review