Abnormal sex ratios in human populations: Causes and consequences

Hesketh, Thérèse; Xing, Zhu Wei

doi:10.1073/pnas.0602203103

Cited by 428 publications

(371 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

351

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But contrary to China, India, and Taiwan, there is no systematic evidence of sex selection in Nepal, although the country is usually considered at risk of anti-girl child bias and sex-selection (Craft (1997);Oster (2005); Hesketh & Xing (2006)), and there are concerns that sex-selective abortion may become more prevalent with the recent change in abortion regime (CREHPA 2007).…”

Section: Summary Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Access to abortion, investments in neonatal health, and sex-selection: Evidence from Nepal

Valente

2014

Journal of Development Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Every year, over 9 million children die under the age of five in developing countries, where the abortion regime is generally very restrictive. Evidence from the United States suggests that abortion liberalization may be a powerful policy tool in the fight against mortality in early life. In this paper, I consider the impact of providing affordable, legal abortion facilities in the high-fertility, high-mortality context of Nepal, on pregnancy outcomes, antenatal and perinatal health inputs, neonatal mortality, and sex-selection. In order to exploit geographical and time variation in coverage, I combine fertility histories with a unique data set recording geo-referenced coordinates and registration dates of newly introduced legal abortion centers. Consistent with the prediction that proximity to a legal abortion center reduces the cost of abortion, I find that the probability of a pregnancy ending in a live birth decreases by 8.1 percent, for a given mother. However, there is no evidence that improved access to abortion increases observed investments in antenatal and prenatal care or unobserved investments favorable to neonatal survival. Access to these legal, first-trimester abortion centers does not appear to have led to more sex-selective terminations.

show abstract

Section: Summary Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Access to abortion, investments in neonatal health, and sex-selection: Evidence from Nepal

Valente

2014

Journal of Development Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, when discussing why women have been neglected in research and clinical practice, it is important to consider the gender order [14], which in most situations and societies implies that women are less valued, politically and economically influential, and subordinate to men. It is generally agreed upon that the reason for selected abortions of female fetuses in large parts of Asia and North Africa, is that more value is put into the life of men than the life of women [51]. Less obvious, but nevertheless similar attitudes implying neglect and omission of women, are probably reasons behind that women receive fewer coronary angiography procedures than men in the USA [18], or that women are not offered the same level of care as men when suffering from psoriasis in Sweden [22].…”

Section: Adding Gender Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Bias in Medicine

Hamberg

2008

Womens Health (Lond Engl)

250

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender bias has implications in the treatment of both male and female patients and it is important to take into consideration in most fields of medical research, clinical practice and education. Gender blindness and stereotyped preconceptions about men and women are identified as key causes to gender bias. However, exaggeration of observed sex and gender differences can also lead to bias. This article will examine the phenomenon of gender bias in medicine, present useful concepts and models for the understanding of bias, and outline areas of interest for further research. Research has shown that different biological processes, anatomies, conditions in daily life, environmental experiences, risk behaviors and responses to stressful events, may all contribute to variation in health and disease in men and women [1-5]. There is also evidence that women, for no apparent medical reason, are not offered the same treatment as men, a phenomenon that raises the question of gender bias. Many studies, for example, show that women are less likely than men to receive more advanced diagnostic and therapeutic interventions [6-11]. The word bias means 'prejudice' or 'distortion' and is a threatening phenomenon in all kinds of research and human activity. When we talk about gender bias in medicine we usually either mean an unintended, but systematic neglect of either women or men, stereotyped preconceptions about the health, behavior, experiences, needs, wishes and so on, of men and women, or neglect of gender issues relevant to the topic of interest. Gender bias has implications in treatment of both male and female patients and it is important to take into consideration in most fields of medical research, clinical practice and education. Gender bias is also a relevant issue in the discussion of clinical and academic advancements and careers [12]; however, that aspect is not the focus of this article. Since there is confusion in medicine about the use of the concept of gender [13], my use of the term is presented below.

show abstract

“…In contrast, the secondary sex ratio, SSR, which may be defined as the proportion of live-born males out of all live births (13), is straightforward to assess and it is the SSR that most population censuses report in public databases (14)(15)(16). At reproductive age, sex ratio bias has the potential to generate substantial public health concerns (8,12,17), leading, for instance, to increased socially disruptive behaviour, transmission of sexually transmitted diseases and mental health problems (18)(19)(20)(21). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%