Sooner, later, or never: Changing fertility intentions due to Covid-19 in China’s Covid-19 epicentre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using survey data collected from Hubei province, China's Covid-19 epicentre, in August 2020, this study examines how fertility intentions of Chinese citizens changed during the Covid-19 pandemic. We consider not only whether people changed their fertility plans due to Covid-19 but also distinguish three types of change: bringing forward ('sooner'), postponing ('later'), and abandoning ('never') planned fertility. Over half of those who planned to have a child intended to change their fertility plans due to Covid-19. Younger individuals, those of non-Han ethnicities, urban residents, those with one child already, and those with ever-infected family members were more likely to change their fertility plans. While the effects of some characteristics seem to be short term, other characteristics such as age and number of children show more consequential influences. Older individuals and those planning their second child were particularly prone to abandoning their childbearing plans due to Covid-19. The pandemic may thus complicate China's latest efforts to boost its low fertility.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".