Analysis of online information about success rates in fertility clinics in Spain. An urgent call for action

Anna De Bayas Sanchez; Virginie Rozée; Manon Vialle; Kristien Hens; Joke Stryuf; Willem Ombelet; María Rosa Tapia Sánchez; Marta María Albert Márquez; Juana Farfán Montero; José Miguel Carrasco; Michaela Fuller; Vera Dimitrievska; Jana Melosca; Nathaniel Barrett; Francisco Güell Pelayo

doi:10.12688/openreseurope.20090.2

Assisted Reproduction · Registries and Reporting

Analysis of online information about success rates in fertility clinics in Spain. An urgent call for action

De Bayas Sanchez A, Rozée V, Vialle M, Hens K, Stryuf J, Ombelet W, Tapia Sánchez MR, Albert Márquez MM, Farfán Montero J, Carrasco JM, Fuller M, Dimitrievska V, Melosca J, Barrett N, Güell Pelayo F

Published October 22, 2025 Open research Europe

DOI 10.12688/openreseurope.20090.2 PMID 41287638 PMC PMC12640485

RRM Academy Synopsis

Four of five Spanish IVF clinic sites give no live birth rate

Four of the five clinic websites reported no live birth rate, a content analysis of the five Spanish fertility clinics with the strongest online presence found. All five reported biochemical pregnancy, and three websites stated that 9 out of 10 achieve pregnancy. Only two clinics said their data were certified.

Key Findings

All five clinics reported success as cumulative per cycle and gave biochemical pregnancy rates; for three clinics that was the only rate. Only one clinic provided live birth rates.
None of the five clearly explained the terms biochemical pregnancy or clinical pregnancy, and only two used those terms explicitly. All five presented rates by age group, with groupings that varied.
Four clinics gave no age-related rates for donor oocytes, and only one covered an age range over 45. Only one separated IVF from ICSI results; four gave a combined rate.
Three websites repeated the message that 9 out of 10 achieve pregnancy. Two tied it to becoming parents, which the authors say strongly implies that 90% of patients achieve a live birth.
Only two clinics stated that their success rate data had been certified. One gave access to a copy of the certificate; the other gave no certificate and no description of the process.

Interpretation

The paper is a content analysis of five private-sector clinic websites, chosen by how visibly they appeared in Google searches. The authors note that the sample does not include every clinic in Spain. The findings describe how clinics presented their figures. The analysis addresses the clarity of that information and compares no clinic outcomes. The authors advise that success rates be defined only as live births, reported by age group, and monitored by independent authorities.

RRM Context

Rates quoted per treatment cycle describe the results of a procedure. IVF bypasses the reproductive system without establishing why conception fails, so a couple can read a clinic's figures and still lack a diagnosis. Restorative reproductive medicine starts by evaluating both partners to find the cause. A fair comparison between approaches needs live birth as the outcome and a stated denominator.

Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.

Abstract

Background

The medically assisted reproduction (MAR) industry is a booming sector of the economy, and Spain is proving to be a notable example of this industry's rise. Marketing strategies in the healthcare sector are shaped by the constant tension between providing clear, complete and appropriate information about treatments and providing information to attract and retain customers.

Methods

We conducted a systematic analysis of success rate information published on the websites of Spain's five with the strongest online presence MAR clinics as of November 2023. The analysis examined terminology, certifications and audits by external bodies, references to data sources, age-specific success rates, and generalised claims about treatment effectiveness.

Results

We identified significant deficiencies and ambiguities in how clinics present success rate data. Common issues included vague definitions, lack of certification details, absence of reliable data sources, and failure to differentiate outcomes by age or treatment type. Several clinics used overly optimistic or potentially misleading statistics, making it difficult for patients to assess their realistic chances of success. We provide recommendations aimed at improving consumer protection and regulating advertising practices. We also emphasise that presenting clear and truthful success rate information is not only a legal requirement but also an ethical duty in reproductive healthcare.

Conclusions

Stronger regulation of success rate reporting in Spain's fertility sector is urgently needed. We recommend that external authorities oversee and standardise data reporting to ensure transparency and prevent misleading practices. A centralised public body should be responsible for monitoring, collecting, and managing this data to protect patient rights and improve trust in fertility care.

Topics

Assisted Reproduction › Registries and Reporting › Success Rate Reporting · Ethics and Policy › Policy and Regulation › Professional Standards

Anna De Bayas Sanchez, Virginie Rozée, Manon Vialle, Kristien Hens, Joke Stryuf, Willem Ombelet, María Rosa Tapia Sánchez, Marta María Albert Márquez, Juana Farfán Montero, José Miguel Carrasco, Michaela Fuller, Vera Dimitrievska, Jana Melosca, Nathaniel Barrett, Francisco Güell Pelayo

A Sanchez, V Rozée, M Vialle, K Hens, J Stryuf, W Ombelet, M Sánchez, M Márquez, J Montero, J Carrasco, M Fuller, V Dimitrievska, J Melosca, N Barrett, F Pelayo

PMID 41287638 41287638 DOI 10.12688/openreseurope.20090.2 10.12688/openreseurope.20090.2 De Bayas Sanchez et al. 2025, De Bayas Sanchez 2025

Analysis of online information about success rates in fertility clinics in Spain. An urgent call for action

Four of five Spanish IVF clinic sites give no live birth rate

Key Findings

Interpretation

RRM Context

Abstract

Topics

By this author

Related research