Adolescent Fertility and Child Health: The Interaction of Maternal Age, Parity and Birth Intervals in Determining Child Health Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Contributing to the Sustainable Development Goals, Global Goals, Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ Health 2016-2030, we clarify the interaction between maternal age, parity and birth intervals to examine the effects on child health. Methods: We use Demographic and Health Survey data from 33 sub-Saharan African countries, and apply multivariate Poisson and logistic models to first examine the effect of maternal age (15-17, 18-19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-39) on infant mortality and stunting, then modify this relationship by parity and account for the confounding effects of short birth intervals. Results: We find that poor infant mortality outcomes of children born to teen mothers are driven by higher parity children, not first-born children. While first-born children of teen mothers are at a high risk of stunting, they are likely to survive. Short birth intervals have a negative effect on infant survival and stunting outcomes. But controlling for short birth intervals does not completely offset the effect of young age at birth on child survival outcomes. Discussion: High parity children of young mothers are at a high risk of infant mortality, driven in part – but not completely – by short birth intervals. Policies aimed at delaying first birth are warranted, but should not overshadow the need to support adolescent mothers at risk of multiple births that are tightly spaced.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".