# Single Women's Success Rates



## some1 (May 13, 2006)

Well, for a while now I have been working on compiling some figures on the success rates among the single women posting on these boards and I now have some results to share.

When I first started down this road, success rates were very important to me in deciding about treatments and I was frustrated that figures for single women were not available. My thinking was that clinic success rates consisted of mainly heterosexual couples having treatment because they had some kind of fertility problem that meant they hadn't been able to conceive naturally. And, that most single women seeking treatment at clinics didn't have a fertility problem, just a lack of access to sperm, so would theoretically be likely to have better success rates than the overall clinic success rates.

In the four years that I have been using FF it seemed to me that posters on the Single Women's thread were being no more successful with their treatments than the national rates suggested they would be, so I decided to look through the single women's posts to see if this was the case or not.

What I have found has raised more questions than it has answered, but I thought I would share the information anyway, as I thought it might be helpful to others and I would be really interested to read others' thoughts on this.

The information I have looked at comes from 116 single women, undergoing 459 clinic treatments (I have excluded home inseminations and any treatments that were cancelled).

Overall, of the 459 treatments, there were 97 BFPs (21.1%), resulting in 49 births/ongoing pregnancies (10.7%)

These can be broken down as follows :

DIUI
Age No. Of Cycles No. Of BFPs No.of Births/Pregs HFEA National Figures for Births
Under 35 34 6 (17.65%) 4 (11.76%) 12.1%-16.5%
35-37 85 9 (10.59%) 5 (5.88%) 11.9%-14.0%
38-39 63 10 (15.87%) 5 (7.94%) 9.9%-10.4%
40-42 45 7 (15.56%) 1 (2.22%) 5.0%-6.5%
43-44 3 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0% -1.2%
Over 45 1 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0%
?age 10 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 
Total 241 32 (13.28%) 15 (6.22%)

DIVF/DICSI/DFET
Age No. Of Cycles No. Of BFPs No.of Births/Pregs HFEA National Figures for Births
Under 35 27 7 (25.93%) 2 (7.41%) 32.30%
35-37 19  11 (57.89%) 6 (31.58%) 27.20%
38-39 42 10 (23.81%) 6 (14.29%) 19.40%
40-42 37 7 (18.92%) 5 (13.51%) 11.80%
43-44 9 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3.90%
Over 45 3 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3.40%
?age 18 4 (22.22%) 0 (0%)
Total 155 39 (25.16%) 19 (12.26%)

DEIVF/DEICSI/DEFET
Age No. Of Cycles No. Of BFPs No.of Births/Pregs HFEA National Figures for Births
Under 35 0
35-37 0
38-39 4 2 (50.00%) 2 (50.00%)
40-42 19 10 (52.63%) 5 (26.23%)
43-44 11 5 (45.45%) 3 (27.27%)
Over 45 20 11 (55.00%) 3 (15.00%)
?age 9 3 (33.33%) 2 (22.22%)
Total 63 31 (49.21%) 15 (23.81%) Frozen Cycles 16.7%, Fresh Cycles 28.5%

It is important to keep in mind that the number of treatments I have reviewed is quite small to draw any firm conclusions from (particularly for Donor Egg). For DIUI and DIVF/DICSI/DFET though, the results do seem to suggest that single women aren't any more likely to be successful than any other woman receiving treatment at a fertility clinic. And for DIUI our results are consistently below the national success rates, which I find pretty puzzling.

Well, I hope you find this information helpful/useful, I hope I haven't made any mistakes, let me know if you find any!

Some1

xx

P.S. Sorry for the wobbly lines, I have tried for ages to correct them and have finally given up!

This research is the personal project of the Member and has not be verified by Fertility Friends.co.uk


----------



## sweet1 (Oct 5, 2008)

That research is fantastic Some1, thank you for posting it.

I have had an inkling that this was the case especially for IUI for a while due to the large number of BFN's. The barely above 5 pc live birth rate for my age group makes depressing reading.

I wonder why our success rates are so low?


----------



## cocochanel1 (Oct 15, 2009)

Some1 - fabulous research as I said in my PM - a very interesting set of results - thank you.

Could the stats be lower because we are predominantly using frozen sperm whereas many couples could be using fresh sperm?

DIVF/DICSI/DFET for the age 40 to 42 bracket has a higher rate than national though which would fit with the theory that single women may have a better fertility profile than national figures (because as you say lack of sperm is the main reason but not necessarily the only reason). But I am surprised about the 43 to 44 age group. 

Also I am really surprised by the 40-42 and 43-44 bracket for DEIVF/DEICSI/DEFET. these success rates are much lower than I would have anticipated which doesn't make sense because it is not linked to egg age but perhaps again frozen sperm is lowering the success rates? Or is it something else? I think it would be worth us all putting our heads together on the 'something else'.
I can see we will all puzzle over these stats for months to come but it is certainly a useful data set.  Thank you Some1.
Coco xxx


----------



## ♥JJ1♥ (Feb 11, 2006)

Some1 wow thanks so much for taking the time to collate the results maybe HFEA might be interested!
x


----------



## caramac (Mar 21, 2010)

Gosh that must have taken you AGES Some1!!!! But thanks for doing it because it makes really interesting reading.


----------



## bingbong (Dec 9, 2008)

Some1 wow, thanks so much for posting that, it's very interesting. I am suprised how far below HFEA our stats often are   I wonder if it is the frozen sperm like Coco suggested  

bingbong x


----------



## some1 (May 13, 2006)

Glad you are finding the stats interesting - thanks very much for the positive comments.  It did end up taking me ages to put together, but once I started it I found I couldn't leave it half done.  I would really like to analyse these figures further, looking at different treatments protocols and clinics but don't think I will find the time to do it unfortunately!

Coco and Bingbong - you asked whether the use of frozen sperm could be affecting our success rates.  For DIUI, the HFEA stats are for IUI with donor sperm so these shouldn't be affected.  For DIVF/DICSI/DFET and DEIVF/DEICSI/DEFET it is possible that frozen sperm is affecting the success rate as the HFEA data just gives overall stats and doesn't differentiate between cycles using fresh sperm versus frozen sperm.  

Some1
xx


----------



## indekiwi (Dec 23, 2008)

Just a quick note as am heading out but Some1, what an amazing piece of research, would love to know a bit more about the data you used and also whether you could, as JJ1 suggests, actually turn this work into something that HFEA etc might be interested in, etc (that is, if it would interest you to do so).  

Going straight to Coco's point re donor sperm being frozen and therefore this leading to lower success rates, since all these stats are for donor related treatment (as I interpreted it from the headings above each table), presumably we are looking at a level playing field between national donor tx statistics and the single women used in the sample?  Or are the HFEA comparative figures representative of all births, not solely donor tx related?

Secondly, for DE related tx, things may well be skewed by fresh sperm being used by couples, since most single women are also using frozen sperm.  However, I am also a little surprised by the stats in this category, not in the generic, but because single women tend to opt for the most successful clinics here and abroad quoting very strong success rates (eg Lister, CRM, Reprofit, Serum, Spanish clinics) and I would therefore have assumed that that stats would have been skewed upwards on account of this factor.  

Finally, on the DE front, many, though not all single women, would have had some attempts using OE tx before heading on to DE, particularly since most of us assume that there is nothing wrong with our reproductive capabilities until we have some / multiple failures and do more comprehensive investigations as to why we are not successful.  We all know that fertility levels drop as we age, but levels for individual women drop at different times - my FSH results etc for example were better than average at 40, but within 18 months had changed completely.  Moreover, arguably had women actively been in a position to TTC in a relationship for several years before turning to fertility tx, arguably they would have discovered that they did in fact have fertility issues that needed to be addressed much earlier on in their lives and would therefore have considered DE tx (and less OE tx) at a commensurately earlier stage.  So I wonder if some of the results posted for women in younger age brackets are likely to be skewed by those whose ovarian reserve / egg quality was compromised earlier than the average, but didn't realise until a number of tx cycles had been experienced with OE.  For those with immune issues or a history of multiple miscarriages  , again, presumably these issues would have come to light much earlier if they were TTC in a heterosexual relationship, which again would have possibly led to different protocols being used earlier in their OE tx with maybe a better chance of success, and for them perhaps electing to try DE tx earlier in age.

Lots of assumptions going on there....

Some1, our posts have crossed - thanks for clearing the first bit up!


A-Mx


----------



## Rose39 (Dec 9, 2007)

Some1 - thank you for taking the time to put these together! The stats are really interesting!

For those asking why our stats are different from HFEA figures, from a market research standpoint, it's difficult to really compare our stats and those of the national average and try to draw conclusions over why our results are or aren't similar. The very small sample size we're dealing with here means that one person who is particularly unlucky (for example me!) will skew the results significantly down (e.g. if you took out the 2 negative IVF cycles I had at age 39, the live birth % would go up to 15%), whereas in the national sample, one person's individual results has very little impact on the national average, they are looking at trends based on thousands of people's cycles and results. 

FET and fresh IVF cycles also have very different average success rates, so usually you'd split those out and do 2 different tables as you're not comparing like with like - but you'd be looking at very tiny sample sizes if we did that here, so they'd be even more skewed by an individual's results. 

I'd actually suggest that the closest that we're going to find to a reliable table of success rates for single women is to look at a clinic such as LWC's results, as a higher proportion of their patients are single or gay women vs other clinics. In LWC's magazine from summer 2008, they showed the results of a study they had done into IUI with donor sperm during 2005 and 2006 (80% of the 503 patients in the study were lesbian women from same-sex couples or single women) - the study showed a 23.7% success rate for the recipients under 35, and 14.5% success rate for the recipients aged 36-40 (as in they had a baby). This may give more confidence to ladies trying IUI for the first time vs our success rates on the single ladies board.

It might actually be worth combining the results for both the single ladies and the ladies on the lesbian/gay board to see if the larger sample size gives a different set of results.

What I'm finding most interesting is the number of BFPs overall! This is very hopeful for anyone starting out on this journey!

Well done Some1 - this is such an interesting topic of debate!!

Rose xx


----------



## some1 (May 13, 2006)

Thanks for your comments Inde and Rose.  You both raise some very interesting/important points.  

It is very true that because we are single women that many of us have not had an opportunity to 'test' our fertility before we start having treatment like couples will have done.  I guess this is an argument for women at the start of the ttc journey to have available tests/investigations done.

When I started compiling this information I was intending to include the ladies on the lesbian/gay board, but it ended up taking so long I didn't manage it.  It would certainly have meant that the results were more reliable

I was thinking that another reason for the stats being lower than might have been expected is that the data has been collected from women using a fertility site.  Although many of us have been posting here since the start of our journeys, there will be many who have actively sought out a fertility site because they were having problems conceiving and this will have affected the success rates I have posted.

Some1

xx


----------



## upsydaisy (May 9, 2009)

Wow Some1 that really is an interesting bit of research.
   for putting in all the hard work .  
It made me quite tearful reading the statistics for my age group when I conceived my daughter.  I've always known she's a miracle but seeing those figures written down is quite shocking.  Especially when it didn't take long to work out who the other 4 were! On the one hand it's great to have this information but on the other I'm sort of  glad I didn't have it at the time.  I knew the odds on it working were rubbish (one undersized follicle, high FSH, low estrogen, numerous endocrine issues etc etc  ) but not how rubbish!  I think the fact this is a fertility web site definitely makes a difference.  The DCN is made up mainly of people who've succeeded in conceiving using a donor so their statistics would probably be completely different.
Thanks again for making me worship my little miracle even more (if that's possible  )
Upsy
xxx


----------



## smilingandwishing (Apr 24, 2010)

Thank you for this some1. It makes really interesting reading. 

I had a couple of thoughts that I think have been aired - but will add anyway  .

It would be interesting to understand the average age that single women start TX.  My hunch is that for  single woman it is prob later than women in relationships - as many women take some time to reach the decision to go it alone. This would also say that there are probably a higher number of first treatments in the older age groups where there is no track record of how ones body responds to drugs etc. 

My other thought is about  size of group. This is a great insight into success rates of people on this site but we must remember a couple of things.
1. The samples sizes are quite small which means they can be easily effected by individual's results - so if someone has been through several BFNs for a particular treatment - that record will be brought down
2. Many women watch this site but don't necessarily post - and (another hunch) women who are having a tough time and fear a BFN may be more likely to post for support that someone breezing through (is that possible) - so we may get exposed to more BFNs than BFPs.

SoI think reason for difference between your research and HFEA stats is porbbaly to do with test conditions rather than us not being as successful.

As others have mentioned - it is really interesting though - and thanks for all your hard work - I think it is something that HFEA should be very interested in seeing - well done!

Smiling xxx


----------



## Chowy (Apr 12, 2008)

Some1 you are such a kind and special person  

It is a very interesting read. Thanks

Chowy and Pup xx     (for Flower of course)


----------



## morrigan (Dec 8, 2009)

Really interesting- must of taken you ages.

I have have heard the HFEA figures can been slewed by how clinics report them- ie there are different ways to record pregnancies as some include chemical pregnancies some don't and some include multiples as 2 live births and some don't- I don't know how much truth is in this but I guess on here you get bare bones of truth not just what the stats rules say.

I would be interested to know how the average number of attempts per person for IUI and IVF in the age brackets stacks up to national figures.

I am assuming that HFEA figures would be UK only. Are UK clinics more likely to look for patients who will give them good success figures- I should stop been cycnical I think!

Random thought - They say stress levels can really effect ability to concieve. Comparing my experiences to those of a few couples I know that have had issues TTC  we reckon that we jump straight to 1 year in as we need treatment straight away but is it more or less stressful to do without a partner?? I have heard a few stories that suggest less !!!


----------



## MistyLake (Jul 7, 2008)

Hi Some One,

Thanks for this work! Oh and congratulations on avoiding controlled crying!
My main thought is that many of us are so stressed whilst having treatment that the figures are worse than they should be. I really hated all the treatment I had, every moment of it. I conceived once I stopped trying!

Rx


----------



## ♥Jovial♥ (Feb 25, 2007)

Some1 WOW!!  This is fantastic, well done and a big thank you!

Love to you & little flower xxx


----------

