LETTER TO EDITOR
|Year : 2007 | Volume
| Issue : 2 | Page : 152-153
Fertility profile and its correlates in a rural population of Dehradun district
Amrita Kansal, R Chandra, SD Kandpal, KS Negi
Department of Community Medicine, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, Jolly Grant, Dehradun - 248 140, Uttaranchal, India
|Date of Submission||04-Jul-2005|
Department of Community Medicine, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, Jolly Grant, Dehradun - 248 140, Uttaranchal
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
|How to cite this article:|
Kansal A, Chandra R, Kandpal S D, Negi K S. Fertility profile and its correlates in a rural population of Dehradun district. Indian J Community Med 2007;32:152-3
|How to cite this URL:|
Kansal A, Chandra R, Kandpal S D, Negi K S. Fertility profile and its correlates in a rural population of Dehradun district. Indian J Community Med [serial online] 2007 [cited 2019 May 26];32:152-3. Available from: http://www.ijcm.org.in/text.asp?2007/32/2/152/35664
The midterm objective of the National Population Policy (NPP) formulated in the year 2000 is to bring the total fertility rate (TFR) to the replacement level of 2.1 by 2010.  No study regarding the fertility status and its related variables has been conducted in the newly formed state of Uttaranchal till date. The National Family Health Survey -II (NFHS-II) was conducted prior to the formation of the state and, therefore, its findings pertain to the undivided state of Uttar Pradesh. The objective of the present study, covering a large sample of 2278 ever-married women, was to estimate the fertility rates in different areas and among different groups in 20 villages around the capital city of the newly-formed state of Uttaranchal.
This cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted among 2278 ever-married women (EMW) in the age range of 15-49 years in the 20 villages of Doiwala block of Dehradun district during October 2003 to March 2004. Roughly 200 respondents in each 5-year age-group are enough to compute the fertility rates. Since seven such age-groups were included in the study population, a minimum sample size of about 1400 married women between 15-49 years of age were needed; this would mean about 300 live births (an average of 30 per age-group), which is sufficient to compute fertility rates.  A multistage sampling technique was used for the selection of the villages. Out of the six blocks in the capital district, one block was selected randomly. The areas under all the five primary health centers of the block were included in the study. The 23 subcentres of the five primary health centres were stratified into two groups based on their proximity to a motorable road: one group included subcenters adjacent to the road and the other group with subcentres that were situated some distance away from any road. From each group, five subcentres were selected. The villages within the area covered by these ten selected subcentres were arranged into two groups, according to their position relative to the subcentre, i.e., one group comprising the subcentre villages and the other group made up of villages situated away from subcentre. From each subcentre, one subcentre village and one village from the other group were selected randomly. Thus, two villages from the area covered by each of the ten subcentres, totaling 20 villages, were selected for the study. Initially we had planned to cover 20% of the estimated total number of married women in each village but, later, to ensure inclusion of at least 200 women in each age-group (except in the 15-19 age-group), about 22.5% of the estimated number of married females from each village were included in the study. Personal interview with house-to-house visits was adopted as the study method. Data compilation and analysis was done using the SPSS package.
Age-specific fertility rate of the study population was highest (315.38) in the age group of 20-24 years and it decreased on either side in the five-year age-groups. The total fertility rate (TFR), general fertility rate (GFR), and crude birth rate (CBR) calculated in the present study were 4.71, 147.06, and 30.09, respectively [Table - 1].
The TFR and the mean number of children ever born to women in the age group of 40-49 years was found to vary by selected background characteristics. In most of the cases, the pattern of differentials in the mean number of children ever born by different background characteristics was parallel to the pattern of differentials in the TFR
The TFR calculated in the present study was 4.71, which is higher than the figure reported for the rural area of the state  (2.76) and for India (3.07) by NFHS-II. Rustein et al .  has mentioned that the TFR calculated in the NFHS might be low estimates, as evidence exists for the omission of recent births. In the present study, the TFR was 2.25 children; the TFR was higher for Muslims than for Hindus, and both of these religious groups had higher fertility rates than the Sikhs. This difference was more in the present study than in the NFHS-2, India (0.8). In the present study, the mean number of children ever born to EMW of age 40-49 years in Muslims were 1.71 children higher than in Hindus, which is comparable to the findings of NFHS-2, India (1.38). This can be because the number of children ever born at age 40-49 years refers to fertility in the past, whereas the TFR only reflects fertility in the preceding one year (preceding three years in NFHS) of the survey. Similar to the finding of the NFHS, the present study too found that the TFR was higher for illiterate women than for those who were educated up to high school. In the present study, the TFR was 1.6 children higher for women who belonged to the lower socioeconomic class than for women belonging to the upper socioeconomic class; this finding is comparable to the finding of NFHS-2, India (1.3).
| References|| |
|1.||National Population Policy, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of India: New Delhi; 2000. |
|2.||Reynolds J. Primary health care management advancement programme: Assessing community needs and coverage module 2, User's guide, Appendix G5 Aga Khan Health Services 1993. |
|3.||National Family Health Survey-2, 1998-99, Uttaranchal, International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai |
|4.||Rustein SO. Fertility levels, trends and differentials: 1995-1999. Calverton, Maryland Marco, 2002. (Comparative Report No.3). |
[Table - 1]