Cited by 57Reproductive Health and ContraceptionDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesGlobal Maternal and Child Health

Geographical distribution of fertility rates in 70 low-income, lower-middle-income, and upper-middle-income countries, 2010–16: a subnational analysis of cross-sectional surveys

Open access
Pezzulo, Carla, Nilsen, Kristine, Carioli, Alessandra, Tejedor-Garavito, Natalia, Hanspal, Sophie E, Hilber, Theodor, James, William H M, Ruktanonchai, Corrine W +6 more·2021·The Lancet Global Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Understanding subnational variation in age-specific fertility rates (ASFRs) and total fertility rates (TFRs), and geographical clustering of high fertility and its determinants in low-income and middle-income countries, is increasingly needed for geographical targeting and prioritising of policy. We aimed to identify variation in fertility rates, to describe patterns of key selected fertility determinants in areas of high fertility. METHODS: We did a subnational analysis of ASFRs and TFRs from the most recent publicly available and nationally representative cross-sectional Demographic and Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys collected between 2010 and 2016 for 70 low-income, lower-middle-income, and upper-middle-income countries, across 932 administrative units. We assessed the degree of global spatial autocorrelation by using Moran's I statistic and did a spatial cluster analysis using the Getis-Ord Gi* local statistic to examine the geographical clustering of fertility and key selected fertility determinants. Descriptive analysis was used to investigate the distribution of ASFRs and of selected determinants in each cluster. FINDINGS: TFR varied from below replacement (2·1 children per women) in 36 of the 932 subnational regions (mainly located in India, Myanmar, Colombia, and Armenia), to rates of 8 and higher in 14 subnational regions, located in sub-Saharan Africa and Afghanistan. Areas with high-fertility clusters were mostly associated with areas of low prevalence of women with secondary or higher education, low use of contraception, and high unmet needs for family planning, although exceptions existed. INTERPRETATION: Substantial within-country variation in the distribution of fertility rates highlights the need for tailored programmes and strategies in high-fertility cluster areas to increase the use of contraception and access to secondary education, and to reduce unmet need for family planning. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2214-109x(21)00082-6

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pezzulo, C., Nilsen, K., Carioli, A., Tejedor-Garavito, N., Hanspal, S. E., Hilber, T., James, W. H. M., Ruktanonchai, C. W., Alegana, V., Sorichetta, A., Wigley, A. S., Hornby, G. M., Matthews, Z., & Tatem, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • John Radcliffe Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Pezzulo, Carla
Venue
The Lancet Global Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-06
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
e802-e812
ISSN
2214-109X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3163221912
Cited by
57
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 1
FWCI
9.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Global Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Refubium (Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca (Universita Degli Studi Di Milano) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • VTechWorks (Virginia Tech) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Universitätsbibliothek der FU Berlin Hochschulschriftenstelle u. Dokumentenserver (cc-by)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (211208, INV-007594)
  • Wellcome Trust (204613/Z/16/Z)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
Keywords
fertility rate, subnational variation, age-specific fertility, total fertility rate, spatial autocorrelation, spatial cluster analysis, contraceptive use, unmet need for family planning, women's secondary education, low-income countries, middle-income countries, fertility determinants
MeSH terms
Birth Rate, Cross-Sectional Studies, Developing Countries, Geography, Humans, Developed Countries

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review