Cited by 185Demographic Trends and Gender PreferencesReproductive Health and ContraceptionFamily Dynamics and Relationships

Family size, fertility preferences, and sex ratio in China in the era of the one child family policy: results from national family planning and reproductive health survey

Ding, Qu Jian, Hesketh, Therese·2006·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine the impact of the one child family policy in China on fertility, preferred family size, and sex ratio. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from the Chinese cross sectional national family planning and reproductive health survey, 2001. Interviews of representative sample of women aged 15-49. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 39,585 women, with a total of 73,202 pregnancies and 56,830 live births. The average fertility rate in women over 35 (n = 17,078) was 1.94 (2.1 in rural areas and 1.4 in urban areas) and for women under 35 (n = 11,543) 1.73 (1.25 and 1.79). Smaller families were associated with younger age, higher level of education, and living in an urban area. The male to female ratio was 1.15 and rose from 1.11 in 1980-9 to 1.23 for 1996-2001. Most women wanted small families: 35% preferred one child and 57% preferred two. CONCLUSION: Since the one child family policy began, the total birth rate and preferred family size have decreased, and a gross imbalance in the sex ratio has emerged.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.38775.672662.80

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Almost every couple will be able to have the number of children they desire under the new policy.

    “The new policy will allow almost all couples to meet their reproductive preference.59,60”

    From The effects of China’s universal two-child policy (2016) · cites this paper as [59]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ding, Q. J., & Hesketh, T.
Affiliations
Zhejiang University (CN)
Corresponding author
Hesketh, Therese
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2006-05-11
Volume
333
Issue
7564
Pages
371-373
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2106478630
Cited by
185
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 12
FWCI
25.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
Keywords
one-child policy, fertility preferences, sex ratio, sex-selective abortion, fertility decline, urban-rural differences, women's reproductive behavior, China
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, China, Family Characteristics, Female, Fertility, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personal Satisfaction, Rural Health, Sex Ratio, Urban Health, Family Planning Policy, Reproductive Medicine

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