Skip to main content
Public Health Reports logoLink to Public Health Reports
. 1981 Jul-Aug;96(4):335–341.

The use of socioeconomic data to predict teenage birth rates. An exploratory study in Massachusetts.

S B Perlman, L V Klerman, E M Kinard
PMCID: PMC1424232  PMID: 7255657

Abstract

In an exploratory study of adolescent fertility in 24 Massachusetts cities, age-specific birth rates constructed specifically for the study constituted the dependable variables. Data from the 1980 U.S. Census provided the independent socioeconomic variables for the analysis. The relationships between birth rates and these independent variables were explored through simple and partial correlation analyses. Results of the analyses confirm the assumption that rates of birth to teenagers vary systematically in relation to socioeconomic variables. They also confirm at the macro level the results of several earlier household survey showing an association between family income on the one hand, and adolescent sexual activity, contraception, and abortion on the other. In the current study, economic variables, particularly the median income of all families in the community, were found to be highly significant predictors of fertility among adolescents 15 to 19 years of age. The fertility of the generation to which the teenagers' mothers belonged (that is, women 35 to 44 years old) was also significantly associated with the teenagers' birth rates. The results for teenage mothers 15 through 17 years old and teenage mothers 18 and 19 years old were similar.

Full text

PDF
335

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Brann E. A. A multivariate analysis of interstate variation in fertility of teenage girls. Am J Public Health. 1979 Jul;69(7):661–666. doi: 10.2105/ajph.69.7.661. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Garbarino J. A preliminary study of some ecological correlates of child abuse: the impact of socioeconomic stress on mothers. Child Dev. 1976 Mar;47(1):178–185. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Johnson C. L. Adolescent pregnancy: intervention into the poverty cycle. Adolescence. 1974 Fall;9(35):391–406. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Kantner J. F., Zelnik M. Contraception and pregnancy: experience of young unmarried women in the United States. Fam Plann Perspect. 1973 Winter;5(1):21–35. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Kantner J. F., Zelnik M. Sexual experience of young unmarried women in the United States. Fam Plann Perspect. 1972 Oct;4(4):9–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Shelton J. D., Brann E. A., Schulz K. F. Abortion utilization: does travel distance matter? Fam Plann Perspect. 1976 Nov-Dec;8(6):260–262. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Shelton J. D. Very young adolescent women in Georgia: has abortion or contraception lowered their fertility? Am J Public Health. 1977 Jul;67(7):616–620. doi: 10.2105/ajph.67.7.616. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Udry J. R., Bauman K. E., Morris N. M. The effect of subsidized family planning services on reproductive behavior in the United States, 1969-1974. Demography. 1976 Nov;13(4):463–478. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Public Health Reports are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES