MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1892092360 · doi:10.25336/p60s32

Age at marriage, contraceptive use and abortion in Yemen, 1991-1997

2004· article· en· W1892092360 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thankam Sunil, Vijayan K. Pillai

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertilityAbortionSocioeconomic statusDemographyFamily planningTotal fertility ratePopulationDeveloping countryGeographySocioeconomicsPregnancyResearch methodologyEconomic growthSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper attempts to examine the extent of influence of the three components of fertility, age at marriage, extent of modern contraceptive use and the level of abortion on fertility in the Republic of Yemen and to explore the impact of a selected set of demographic and socioeconomic variables on the three fertility components. This study uses data from Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) conducted in Yemen in 1991/1992 and 1997. The results from this study present empirical evidence of an onset of fertility decline in the Republic of Yemen. An important component of this decline is delayed age at marriage. There has been an increase in modem contraceptive use during the last decade. However, these methods are not widely used at early stages of family formation. The most common method of family limitation among women with large families is abortion. There has been very little change if any in the widespread occurrence of abortion during the last decade. There exist significant urban-rural differences in the levels of contraceptive use and abortion. Improvements in women's education and modern sector labor participation are crucial for increasing age at marriage, and level of contraceptive use and for reducing the prevailing level of abortion.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207