Fertility in Islamic Republic of Iran: Levels, Trends and Differentials during Three Decades (1967-1996)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focuses on the fertility levels and trends of Iranian women aged 10- 49 years during three decades, 1967-1996. Information was collected by interviewing a systematic cluster sample of 13,253 households. The basic date of concern was the date of each live born child for a sample of women in reproductive age and whether the live born was alive at the time of the study. The detailed nature of these data collected for each birth enabled fertility rates to be calculated for exact periods before the survey, for exact calendar years. Higher fertility rates were found for the period 10-15 and 15-20 years preceding the survey. These high fertility levels are probably due to some socio-economic changes in favor of higher level of fertility immediately after the 1979 revolution. However the results of the present survey show during 1967-1996, the TFR1 had dropped from 6.38 to 2.88 (an expected TFR based on fertility behavior during 1992-96). This decline was probably due to delay in marriage and policy changes in favor of population control particularly since 1987. Despite this potential fertility decline in recent years, Iran is expected to face a baby boom as the offspring who were born during the 1976-86 reach to the reproductive age in the coming decades.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".