TFR using tfr2 using NFHS-1 (1992-93) [message #19153] |
Thu, 30 April 2020 03:46 |
Santosh88
Messages: 9 Registered: November 2019
|
Member |
|
|
I am trying to estimate the TFR using NFHS-1 (1992-93 data of India using tfr2 command in STATA.
I am getting the total TFR which is matching with the National report of NFHS-1, but when I am trying to estimate the TFR for Urban and Rural, the estimates are not matching with the report.
According to NFHS-1 report
TFR (Total)=3.39
TFR (Urban)= 2.70
TFR (Rural)=3.67
But according to my analysis, using the syntax
by v025, sort: tfr2 , awf( awfactt)
the estimate are diffrent
TFR (urban)= 3.09
TFR(Rural) =3.52
Please help me to estimate the correct TFR for Urban and Rural NFHS-1 data.
|
|
|
Re: TFR using tfr2 using NFHS-1 (1992-93) [message #19154 is a reply to message #19153] |
Thu, 30 April 2020 03:56 |
schoumaker
Messages: 65 Registered: May 2013 Location: Belgium
|
Senior Member |
|
|
You should use the correct all-women factors, which for rural urban comparisons is awfactu
If you type this command, you will get the same results as the published results.
by v025, sort: tfr2 , awf(awfactu)
Best regards,
Bruno Schoumaker
Bruno Schoumaker
Centre for Demographic Research
Université catholique de Louvain
|
|
|
|
Re: TFR using tfr2 using NFHS-1 (1992-93) [message #19209 is a reply to message #19155] |
Sun, 10 May 2020 03:23 |
schoumaker
Messages: 65 Registered: May 2013 Location: Belgium
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hello,
You can compute age-specific marital fertility rates with tfr2 (this was discussed in other threads on this forum). With the percentage of married women by age group, you should be able to implement your method.
Best regards,
Bruno Schoumaker
Bruno Schoumaker
Centre for Demographic Research
Université catholique de Louvain
|
|
|
|