Adolescent fertility and its determinants in Kenya: Evidence from Kenya demographic and health survey 2014.

BACKGROUND: Adolescent fertility in Kenya is vital in the development and execution of reproductive health policies and programs. One of the specific objectives of the Kenyan Adolescent Sexual Reproductive Health (ASRH) policy developed in 2015 is to decrease early and unintended pregnancies in an attempt to reduce adolescent fertility. We aimed to establish determinants of adolescent fertility in Kenya.
METHODS: The Kenya Demographic and Health Survey (KDHS) 2014 data set was utilized. Adolescent's number of children ever born was the dependent variable. The Chi-square test was utilized to determine the relationship between dependent and independent variables. A Proportional-odds model was performed to establish determinants of adolescent fertility at a 5% significance level.
RESULTS: Over 40% of the adolescent girls who had sex below 17 years had given birth i.e, current age 15-17 years (40.9%) and <15 years (44.9%) had given birth. In addition, 70.7% of the married adolescents had given birth compared to 8.1% of the unmarried adolescents. Moreover, 65.1% of the adolescents who were using contraceptives had given birth compared to only 9% of the adolescents who were not using a contraceptive. Approximately 29.4% of the adolescents who had no education had given birth compared to 9.1% who had attained secondary education. Age at first sex (18-19 years: OR: 0.221, 95% CI: 0.124-0.392; 15-17 years: OR: 0.530, 95% CI: 0.379-0.742), current age (18-19 years: OR: 4.727, 95% CI: 3.318-6.733), current marital status (Not married: OR:0.212, 95% CI: 0.150-4.780), and current contraceptive use (Using: OR 3.138, 95% CI: 2.257-4.362) were associated with adolescent fertility.
CONCLUSION: The study established that age at first sex, current age, marital status, and contraceptive use are the main determinants of adolescent childbearing. The stated determinants should be targeted by the government to control the adolescent birth rate in Kenya. Consequently, delaying the age at first sex, discouraging adolescent marriage, and increasing secondary school enrollment among adolescent girls are recommended strategies to control adolescent fertility in Kenya.

Introduction

According to World Health Organization (WHO), approximately 16 million adolescent girls give birth every year, an average global birth rate of 49 per 1000 births. Nearly 95 percent of these births occur in low and middle-income countries with a majority of the births occurring among adolescents who are less educated, poor, and rural residence [1]. Despite the universal decline in the adolescent birth rate since 1990, adolescent fertility remains high in many developing countries [2] and remains a great concern to policymakers. The highest percentage of adolescent births which is 46 percent is experienced in Sub-Sahara Africa, followed by Southern and Central Asia at 18 percent then Latin America and the Caribbean at 14 percent [3]. Sub-Saharan Africa’s (SSA) adolescent birth rate is estimated at 101 births per 1,000 women [3]. African countries with the highest teenage pregnancies are Niger, Mali, Angola, Mozambique, Guinea, Chad, and Cote d’Ivoire [4].

In Kenya, the adolescent birth rate has been declining more slowly from 168 live births in 1977/78 to 96 live births in 2014 with the rate remaining high [2, 5]. In 40 years, this is a gradual decline considering the Kenyan total fertility rate (TFR) experienced a major decline between 1977–78 and 2014 from 8.1 to 3.9 births per woman and the fact that the average adolescent birth rate in developed countries stands at 19 live births per 1,000 women, a difference of 77 live births. The adolescent fertility rate in Kenya increases swiftly as adolescents advance in an age such that 3 percent of adolescents had given birth by their 15th birthday while 40 percent of the adolescent had given birth by their 19th birthday [5]. It is reported that in Kenya about 11% of the female adolescents had given birth before 20 years of age [3].

Various studies have been undertaken to establish key factors associated with adolescent fertility. Key determinants identified in these studies are current age, type of place of residence, education level, contraceptive usage, and wealth index [6-10]. However, other factors that are associated with adolescent fertility but vary from country to country and even within the countries disparities still exist were, employment status, marital status, postpartum infecundability, parents’ income, religion, media exposure, the status of living with a partner and practice of sexual relations [6-10]. According to Bongaarts [11], 96% of the difference in fertility levels among societies is explicated by four proximate determinants which are the prevalence of contraceptive use, incidences of induced abortion, fertility inhibiting effect of breastfeeding, and the proportion of females married. These four variables provided a parsimonious framework with measurable and quantifiable variables.

In Kenya, a myriad of factors are associated with the escalating adolescent birth rate with limited studies identifying key factors influencing adolescent childbearing. Westoff [12] established that the rise in adolescent fertility was associated with the stall in contraceptive use among Kenyan youths [12]. The proportion of adolescents aged 15–19 years who did not approve the use of family planning increased from 13.4 percent to 22.4 percent (a 66% increase) between 1998 and 2003. In addition, the study established that fertility preferences of adolescents were changing in favor of larger family sizes and their negative attitude towards family planning was also increasing. According to [13], adolescent childbearing in Kenya was higher in rural than in urban areas, among 18 to 19-year-olds, those with primary or no schooling, those who did not attend school, ever married individuals, and those from households in the bottom two wealth quintiles. The study also established that pregnancy was unintended in a quarter of the adolescent girls who had begun childbearing. In recent years, premarital childbearing in Kenya has been of great concern among policymakers, an aspect that is amplified by the terse observation that the majority of the young pregnant women are poor, not in a union and that even if they were, the union could be illegal.

This study had two aims, first, to find out proximate determinants of adolescent fertility outcome (aggregate analysis and disaggregation by place of residence) and second to establish select demographic, economic, and cultural factors significantly associated with adolescent fertility outcomes at an individual level within the Bongaarts framework and hence contribute to the body of knowledge. Exploring the factors associated with teenage childbearing ensures targeted programs to this vulnerable population sub-group for policymakers and to aid in reducing the teen pregnancy incidence.

Methods

The study used the 2014 KDHS dataset which is the sixth national Demographic and Health Survey since 1989 when the first nationally representative survey of this nature was conducted. The 2014 KDHS data was collected from May 2014 to October 2014 where a sample representing all women between 15 to 49 years was interviewed. The survey collected data on women’s complete birth history which makes it appropriate for this study. A sum of 31,079 women respondents participated in the survey. For this study, we included adolescent women aged 15–19 who were 5,820 (18.7%) of the total women interviewed. The operation framework used for the variables included in the study is presented in Fig 1.

Fig 1

Operational framework.

Background factors

Fig 1.

Study variables

Adolescent Fertility, the key-dependent variable was used interchangeably in the study to mean adolescent childbearing, teenage childbearing, or teenage fertility. This was the total number of children a female between age 15 and 19 had given birth to at the time of the survey. The variable was assessed by recoding the KDHS variable on Total Number of Children Ever Born among the female adolescent, 15–19 years, as (0, 1, and 2+). Independent variables included age at first sex which was the age at which a female adolescent (15–19 years) experienced her first sexual intercourse; current age, current marital status, highest education level which was the highest level of education the female adolescent had attained during the period of the survey (Higher, primary, secondary, no education), type of place of residence, wealth index, which was measured in the KDHS by creating an index from household assets including radio, TV, bicycle, car, electricity, motorbike and dwelling features such as sources of water and sanitation facilities and type of material used for roofing and construction. In the study female adolescents were grouped according to their wealth status (rich, middle, and poor). Other variables were employment status, current contraceptive use, religion, frequency of listening to Radio and ethnicity.

Statistical analysis

The dependent variable was categorized into no child, one child and two or more children which was ordinal. We explored the variables descriptively using frequency and percentages and then compared them using the Chi-square test to find out specific significant demographic, economic, and cultural factors associated with the dependent variable. The ordinal regression model was used to model the effect of explanatory variables on the predictor variable. The proportional odds model was preferred due to the ordinal nature of the outcome variable of interest. In addition, the Bongaarts model on proximate determinants of fertility was also utilized to identify the factors.

Proportional-odds cumulative logit model

The model overcomes limitations of the chi-square test as it shows the magnitude of the relationship between the response and the independent variables in terms of the odds ratio. There were three groupings of the dependent variable, which was similar to two binary responses i.e. (i) 2+ children versus 1 child or no child and (ii) 2+ children or 1 child versus no child. There was thus a cut-off (threshold) at 2+ children the first logit and another at 1 child, forming the second logit. The model simultaneously uses all (J) cumulative logits. The simple form of the model is denoted by: Where:

α = Separate intercept parameters also known as cut-off parameters

j = Level of the ordered category with 3 levels

β = Sets of regression parameters for each logit

= The set of explanatory variables (1).

Every cumulative logit has an intercept that increases as the categories of the dependent variable increase. The model assumes the same effects of β for each logit [13, 14]. The odds ratio with their 95% confidence interval was calculated to find out the magnitude and relationship presence. The proportionality of odds for the dependent variable was tested using the Chi-square test and log-likelihood test.

Bongaarts model of proximate determining factors of fertility

The five factors that symbolize teenage fertility in the Bongaarts framework include, portion married (Cm), Contraception (Cc), induced abortion (Ca), postpartum infecundability (Ci), and primary sterility (Cp). If an index is close to 1, the fertility delay effect is insignificant. However, if an index is 0, its effect on fertility impediment is maximum. The formula below gives a summary of the Bongaarts original model [11, 15]. It is represented as: -

TFR represents the Total Fertility Rate; the average number of children a woman will have born by the end of her reproductive life (approximately 50 years). While TF represents the Total Fecundity Rate; the total number of births to a woman by the end of her reproductive life if she was to remain married and according to the prevalent age-specific marital fertility rate. The aggregate model above can be modified for use in establishing age-specific fertility determinants. In addition, the model is applied even if some index information is missing or unavailable by assuming the value 1 for those indices. Consequently, since abortion is illegal in Kenya, the abortion index was equated to 1 [11, 15]. Replacing the mathematical Eq (1) above, the analysis of age-specific fertility determinants for the 15–19 years adolescents becomes: - Cm (15–19), Cc (15–19), Ca (15–19), Ci (15–19), and Cp (15–19) represents indices between 15–19 years computing fertility impeding effect of marriage, contraception, abortion, postpartum insusceptibility and sterility index correspondingly. Further AF, represents the age-specific fecundity rate, the highest potential biological number of births, while ASFR is the Age-Specific Fertility Rate. Since AF is equal to 511 per 1000 women aged between 15 and 19 years, 2.5 births per woman are arrived at by multiplying AF by five [11]. Theoretically, it means, a teenager who did not breastfeed, stayed married from 15 to 19 years, in addition to not using contraceptives the highest possible births would be 2.5 by age 19 years. Replacing AF with 2.5 in Eq (2) above becomes: Eq 3 will thus be used to calculate the indices for the proximate variables stated above.

Calculation of marriage (Cm (15–19)) index

Marriage index is calculated with the formula: Cm (15–19) = m (20–24)*0.75. In the equation,m (20–24) is the fraction of married women among females aged 20–24 years. Since premarital conception occurrences among teenagers between 15 to 19 years are significant, 0.75 is a constant in the equation.

Calculation of contraception (Cc (15–19)) index

Contraception index is expressed by; Cc (15–19) = 1-c*u/f. In the formula, c is typically 0.61 for women aged 24 years and below, representing the mean contraception effectiveness while u denotes the presently married fraction of adolescents who were also presently using contraception. f is typically 0.98 for women aged 24 years and below, symbolizing the fraction of presently fecund women.

Calculation of postpartum insusceptibility (Ci (15–19)) index

Postpartum insusceptibility index will be calculated by the formula:

In the formula, i (15–19) denotes months of postpartum insusceptibility which is derived from the mean length of breastfeeding. The value of ‘i’ is equal to 1.753e0.1396B-0.00187B*B. In the equation, B denotes the average breastfeeding period in months.

Primary sterility (Cp (15–19)) index estimation

The primary sterility index was assigned the value of 1 since its effect is insignificant in countries of Eastern Africa, Kenya included [6].

Index of induced abortion (Ca (15–19)) estimation

In Kenya, abortion is illegal. Consequently, the value of the index will be 1; meaning abortion has a negligible effect on fertility [15].

Ethics statement

Specific ethical approval was not required for the 2014 KDHS secondary data analysis. Consequently, a secondary analysis was done under the original consent provided by participants during the data collection process. However, permission to use the data was obtained from ICF Macro from the URL https://dhsprogram.com/data. The dataset title is KEIR7SV.ZIP. Their user instructions were followed, which included, treating the data as confidential and no effort should be made to identify any household or individual respondent interviewed in the survey.

Results

Sample characteristics

Table 1 presents basic demographic, economic, and cultural characteristics of adolescents who were 5,820. A majority, 3,510 (60.3%) were young adolescents between 15–17 years of age and the rest 2,309 (39.7%) were 18 to 19 years of age. A majority of the adolescents, 1,230 (57.6%) had their first sex between 15–17 years of age, and most of them, 5,210 (89.5%) had not been married. Most adolescents (68.1%) lived in rural areas and they were neither working 2,108 (77.6%) nor using contraceptives 5,232 (89.9%). Those who had attained primary education were the majority (49.9%) followed by secondary education (45%) while a few had attained higher education (2.8%) and the rest had no education (2.3%). Approximately 36.7% of the adolescents who were interviewed had engaged in sexual activities with a majority (86.7%) having their first intercourse aged 17 years and below and as a result, they had given birth more compared to those whose first intercourse age was from 18 to 19. Additionally, 28.2% of adolescents aged between 18 and 19 years had given birth compared to only 5.8% of adolescents aged between 15–17 years. Further, adolescents who were married, working, and using contraceptives had more births than their counterparts. About, 29.4% of adolescents with no education had given birth compared to 19.6% who had primary education and 9.1% who had attained secondary education. In addition, 26.8% of adolescents who were of the Maasai/Samburu ethnic group had the most births, followed by Luo (19.8%), Mijikenda/Swahili/Taita/Taveta (17.9%), and Kalenjin/Turkana (17.5%) respectively. Significant explanatory factors that were related to adolescent fertility at a 5% significance level included age at first intercourse, current age, current marital status, highest education level attained, wealth index, employment status, current contraceptive use, religion, regularity of listening to the radio and ethnicity.

Table 1

Variables distribution and association of adolescents fertility in Kenya, 2014.

Variable (n = 5820)			Children Ever Born (%)
	Frequency	%	0	1	2+	P-Value
Age at first sex						< 0.0001*
18–19	283	13.3	82.7	17.3	0.0
15–17	1230	57.6	59.2	35.9	5.0
<15	622	29.1	55.1	32.0	12.9
Current age						0.000*
18–19	2309	39.7	71.8	22.4	5.8
15–17	3510	60.3	94.2	5.4	0.4
Current Marital Status						< 0.0001*
Not Married	5210	89.5	91.9	7.4	0.7
Married	609	10.5	29.2	52.5	18.2
Highest education level						< 0.0001*
Higher	165	2.8	93.9	6.1	0.0
Primary	2903	49.9	80.4	15.4	4.2
Secondary	2620	45.0	91.0	8.5	0.6
No education	133	2.3	70.7	21.1	8.3
Type of place of residence						0.179
Rural	3961	68.1	85.0	12.2	2.8
Urban	1859	31.9	86.0	12.0	2.0
Wealth Index						< 0.0001*
Rich	2228	38.3	89.4	9.3	1.3
Middle	1332	22.9	84.2	13.7	2.1
Poor	2260	38.8	81.9	14.0	4.1
Employment Status						< 0.0001*
Working	610	22.4	71.5	22.5	6.1
Not Working	2108	77.6	89.6	8.8	1.6
Current Contraceptive Use						< 0.0001*
Using	588	10.1	34.9	53.2	11.9
Not using	5232	89.9	91	7.5	1.5
Religion						< 0.0001*
Other/No religion	52	0.9	50.0	36.5	13.5
Protestant	4062	69.9	85.7	11.7	2.6
Muslim	485	8.3	87.0	9.3	3.7
Roman Catholic	1213	20.9	84.9	13.8	1.3
Frequency of Listening to Radio						0.002*
Less than once a week	922	15.9	86.6	12.1	1.3
At least once a week	3842	66.0	85.9	11.3	2.7
Not at all	1053	18.0	82.1	15.0	2.8
Ethnicity						< 0.0001*
Other	146	2.5	83.6	12.3	4.1
Kalenjin /Turkana	816	14.0	82.5	14.3	3.2
Kamba	653	11.2	89.9	9.3	0.8
Embu /mbeere/Meru	331	5.7	84.3	14.5	1.2
Kisii	321	5.5	85.0	13.1	1.9
Luhya/Iteso	1089	18.7	84.7	12.9	2.5
Luo	726	12.5	80.2	16.5	3.3
Maasai/Samburu	149	2.6	73.2	17.4	9.4
Mijikenda/Swahili/Taita/Taveta	436	7.5	82.1	13.5	4.4
Boran/Gabbra/Somali	206	3.5	91.7	4.9	3.4
Kikuyu	946	16.3	92.1	6.7	1.3

Source: own calculations; *Significant at 5%; P≤0.05.

Table 2 describes the adolescent’s fertility patterns. The average age was 16.5 years. Virtually, 855 (14.7%) had given birth while 4965 (85.3%) had not. Among the adolescents who had ever given birth, approximately three quarters (74.7%) had first birth at 17 years or below whereas 560 (65.5%), had first birth amid 15 to 17 years. Twelve (12) years was the youngest age at birth stated. The mean year of the adolescent at first birth was 16.5 ± 1.5 years while the median age was 17 years. Overall, 2.6% of the adolescents had given birth to two or more children while 12.1% had given birth to 1 child. Average births were 1.2 ± 0.4. Nearly 263 (4.5%) of teenagers were pregnant during the survey period.

Table 2

Adolescent reproductive pattern in Kenya, 2014.

Characteristic	Percentage (%)
Ever given Birth(n = 5820)
Yes	14.7
No	85.3
Pregnant Currently (n = 5820)
Yes	4.5
No	95.5
Total Children Ever Born (n = 5820)
2+	2.6
1	12.1
0	85.3
Average birth ± SD = 1.2 ± 0.438
Age at first birth in Years (n = 855)
<15	9.2
15–17	65.5
18–19	25.3
Average age ± SD = 16.5±1.48
Intermediate Age in years = 17

Source: own calculations.

Proximate determinants of adolescent fertility

Table 3 illustrates proximate factors associated with adolescent childbearing in Kenya. The observed age-specific fertility rate (ASFR) was 0.17 births per woman. Implying, nearly 2.33 births per adolescent were prevented because of not being married, use of contraception, and postpartum infecundability. Close to 2.34 births per adolescent out of the highest biological number of 2.5 births were avoided among urban teenagers whereas 2.32 births per adolescent residing in rural areas were prevented. Adolescents’ marital index (Cm) was 0.36, implying, not being married decreased adolescent childbearing by 64 percent. The marital indicator was lesser for adolescents that resided in urban areas (0.34) compared to adolescents that resided in rural areas (0.37). Postpartum infecundability was also a significant factor associated with adolescent childbearing; overall it decreased 24% of the biologically maximum expected adolescent childbearing level in marriage. Its impact was rather greater among teenage urban dwellers compared to adolescents who were rural dwellers. The use of contraception decreased fertility among adolescents by 25% of the total marital fertility. The effect was stronger in urban Kenya with a reduction of 32% of all marital fertility compared to rural areas where the reduction was 22%. Family planning use is more effective in urban Kenya compared to rural Kenya.

Table 3

Proximate determinants indices of adolescent fertility, Kenya, 2014.

Index (n = 5820)	Rural (index)	Births Averted	Urban (index)	Birth Averted	Total (Index)	Births Averted (Total)
Marital index (Cm)	0.37	2.13	0.34	2.16	0.36	2.14
Contraception Use index (Cc)	0.78	1.72	0.68	1.82	0.75	1.75
Postpartum Insusceptibility index (Ci)	0.77	1.73	0.74	1.76	0.76	1.74
Predicted ASFR*	0.56	1.94	0.43	2.07	0.51	1.99
Observed ASFR**	0.18		0.16		0.17

*Predicted by Bongaarts Index.

** Calculated from births in the last five years.

Factors associated with adolescents fertility

Table 4 shows the association of selected independent variables with the outcome variable of adolescent fertility. The ordinal regression model was fitted based on predictor variables that were found to be significant with the outcome variable after bivariate analysis and the most important variables retained for the regressions analysis. Overall, age at first intercourse, current age, the current status of marriage and current contraceptive usage were important determinants of teenage childbearing. Adolescents who had first intercourse from age 18 and above had fewer children (OR: 0.221; 95% CI: 0.124–0.392) and so do adolescents that had first sex between age 15 and 17 (OR: 0.530; 95% CI: 0.379–0.742) in comparison with those that had first sex when they were less than 15 years old. Older adolescents (18–19 years) were associated with higher fertility. Adolescents who were between 18 and 19 years of age had more children (OR: 4.727; 95% CI: 3.318–6.733) than those who were between 15 and 17 years old. Adolescent non-marriage was associated with lower fertility. Unmarried adolescents had a lower number of children (OR: 0.212; 95% CI: 0.150–4.780) than those who were married. In addition, contraceptive use among adolescents was associated with increased fertility with an adolescent who was using contraceptive having a higher number of children (OR: 3.138; 95% CI: 2.257–4.362) than those who were not using a contraceptive. On the other hand, the highest education level attained, wealth index, employment status, religion, regularity of radio listening and ethnicity were insignificant after controlling for other factors.

Table 4

Determinants of adolescents fertility in Kenya, 2014.

		95% CI
Variable (n = 5820)	AOR	Lower	Upper	p-value
Age at First Sex
18–19	0.221	0.124	0.392	< 0.000*
15–17	0.53	0.379	0.742	< 0.000*
<15 (RC)
Current Age
18–19	4.727	3.318	6.733	< 0.000*
15-17(RC)
Current Marital Status
Not Married	0.212	0.15	4.78	< 0.000*
Married(RC)
Highest Education level
Higher	0.374	0.093	1.498	0.165
Primary	1.555	0.529	4.566	0.422
Secondary	0.755	0.248	2.299	0.621
No education(RC)
Wealth Index
Rich	0.69	0.469	1.015	0.06
Middle	0.877	0.594	1.296	0.511
Poor(RC)
Employment Status
Working	1.091	0.801	1.485	0.580
Not Working (RC)
Current Contraceptive Use
Using	3.138	2.257	4.362	< 0.000*
Not Using(RC)
Religion
Other/No religion	5.608	1.55	20.289	0.009*
Protestant	1.047	0.726	1.509	0.808
Muslim	1.298	0.463	3.643	0.620
Roman Catholic(RC)
Regularity of Radio Listening
< once a week	0.704	0.408	1.215	0.207
At least once a week	1.032	0.685	1.554	0.880
Not at all(RC)
Ethnicity
Other	0.887	0.277	2.84	0.840
Kalenjin /Turkana	1.51	0.851	2.68	0.159
Kamba	0.756	0.388	1.475	0.413
Embu /mbeere/Meru	0.9	0.419	1.933	0.787
Kisii	1.643	0.79	3.417	0.184
Luhya/Iteso	1.716	0.972	3.03	0.063
Luo	1.335	0.752	2.369	0.324
Maasai/Samburu	2.24	0.885	5.67	0.089
Mijikenda/Swahili/Taita/Taveta	1.664	0.709	3.904	0.242
Boran/Gabbra/Somali	0.742	0.148	3.731	0.717

Source: own calculations. RC = Reference Category; *Significant at p<0.05.

Discussion

Generally, most of the adolescents interviewed had first sex between 15–17 years of age, were not married, had attained primary education (49.9%) others had managed secondary education (45%) as well as not using contraceptives (89.9%). In addition, most of them had not given birth (85.3%). For those who had given birth (14.7%), a majority’s age at first birth was between 15–17 years. This was consistent with the finding of the study by [2] which revealed that almost one in five female adolescents had a child before their 18th birthday and the fact that a majority of them (9 out of 10) were not married.

It was observed that 85.3% of female adolescents interviewed had not given birth while 14.7% have given birth. This was consistent with an analysis by [2] that revealed that globally, teenagers are not necessarily having more children since adolescent fertility has slightly declined. Nevertheless, among the adolescent births that do occur, more occur outside marriage. Subsequently, the biggest challenge in Kenya is the mistimed births among fertile adolescents. The overall country-specific proportion of adolescents that had given birth in Kenya was lower than the proportion documented for Malawi (20.1%), Uganda (19.2%), Tanzania (19.6%) and higher than the proportion documented in Ethiopia (14.4%), Rwanda, (3.3%), Eritrea (11.0%) and Ghana (10.2%) [8, 16–18].

An analysis of the Bongaarts model revealed that fertility proximate variables had a greater influence on biological fertility decline among adolescent urban dwellers than rural dwellers. In addition, not being married resulted in a 64% reduction in observed ASFR (Cm = 0.36). The probable explanation is that a majority (89.5%) were not married. Contraceptive usage had an inhibiting result of 25%. Comparatively, fertility obstruction for usage of contraceptive, not being married and postpartum infecundity was greater among urban dwellers (Cc = 0.68, Cm = 0.34, Ci = 0.74) than rural dwellers (Cc = 0.78, Cm = 0.37, Ci = 0.77). The variation between the two categories is caused by the fact that the probability of adolescents who reside in urban areas, using contraceptives and delaying marriage is higher compared to their rural counterparts [6]. However, the index of postpartum infecundity contradicts the results of an Ethiopian study since these study findings revealed that the inhibitory effect of postpartum infecundity was greater among adolescent urban residents compared to rural dwellers [19]. Generally, the predicted ASFR for both urban and rural residences was substantively greater than the observed age-specific fertility rate (0.51 versus 0.17). The greater variation observed while comparing model and observed estimates would be attributed to exclusion of significant determinants in the regression [6]. This may include underreporting of contraceptive use and absence of abortion from the model, resulting in an overestimation of adolescent fertility [19, 20].

In the study, age at first sex, current age, marital status and use of contraceptives were the key factors associated with adolescent childbirth in Kenya. Teenagers who had had their first sex in late adolescence (18–19 years) had a lesser probability of giving birth. The finding is in line with that of Ethiopia by [21] which revealed that fertility was higher for adolescents who began sexual intercourse before their 18th birthday compared to those who had not begun sexual intercourse.

Adolescent age was a significant determinant of fertility. Older adolescents (18–19) had a higher probability of fertility compared to the younger ones. This was in line with by most of the research inferences that indicate a positive relationship between adolescent age and fertility. Some of the studies include a Malawian study utilizing 2010 Malawi DHS data that revealed an increase in teenage fertility with rising adolescent age. This was also consistent with findings of Brazil, Nigeria, and Ethiopia [6, 9, 22, 23].

The adolescent state of marriage was an important determinant of adolescent childbearing. Adolescents who were not married had a lesser probability of having children unlike the married. Results of the study revealed that the percentage of married adolescents who had children was 70.7%, while the percentage of adolescents who were not married and had children was 8.1%. Implying, married adolescents had a higher likelihood of giving birth unlike unmarried adolescents. It is worth noting that despite marriage being the most important proximate determinant of fertility, being pregnant can also accelerate propensity to marry, hence a limitation of this study that needs to be examined. The finding was consistent with studies in Malawi, Ethiopia, Nigeria and Central Java which revealed that marital status had a positive effect on fertility [7, 9, 10, 23].

Contraceptive use was a significant determinant of adolescent fertility. Adolescents who were using contraceptives had a greater chance of having given birth. This was in line with other African studies which found out that teenagers who were currently using contraceptives had higher fertility [7, 23].

Strengths

The study utilized data from the Kenya Demographic and Health Survey, 2014. The sample for the survey was drawn from a master sampling frame, the Fifth National Sample Survey and Evaluation Programme (NASSEP V) which was weighted for national representation. Consequently, the sample was a representative estimate of the entire adolescent population in the country. In addition, sampling ensured more detailed information on factors associated with adolescent fertility was collected with more accuracy and reliability. Thus, the data being nationally representative, accurate and reliable, the findings of the study gives insights that will enhance the design and implementation of reproductive health strategies, policies and programs aimed at reducing adolescent childbearing in Kenya.

Study limitation

The study utilized secondary data from 2014 KDHS; hence, the study relied on variables collected during the survey. Further, since the DHS data is cross-sectional we could only ascertain associations and not causality for the predictor variables under study. In addition, since abortion is illegal in Kenya, data on induced abortion was not collected, hence the index was assigned the value 1. Similarly, the index on primary sterility was considered as 1 as its effect in Kenya is insignificant. Given that no similar survey has been conducted since 2014, the data could not provide analytical insights into the prevailing adolescent childbearing rate, given anecdotal evidence that teenage childbearing increased during the closure of schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Conclusion

The results of the analysis of the Bongaarts model revealed that not being married was the single most important factor associated with adolescent childbearing in Kenya. On fitting the ordinal regression model, the results concluded that age at first intercourse, current age, marital status, and usage of contraceptives were the key contributing factors to adolescent childbearing in Kenya. Teenagers who had had initial intercourse in late adolescence the (18–19 years) had a lower likelihood of giving birth. In addition, older adolescents (18–19) had a greater probability of fertility, unlike younger adolescents. Further, adolescents who were using contraceptives were more likely to have given birth unlike non-users. Whereas unmarried teenagers had a lower probability of fertility compared to those who were married.

High adolescent fertility in Kenya remains a great challenge. The government should strive to increase secondary school enrollment and discourage early marriages before the age of 18 in the country. In addition, targeted programs should be developed to delay age at first sex which has an inverse relationship to adolescent childbearing in the country. The programs should be launched equally among adolescents dwelling in rural and urban regions since adolescent’s residence was not an important factor affecting fertility.

13 Jul 2021

PONE-D-21-14209

Adolescent Fertility and its Determinants in Kenya: Evidence from Kenya Demographic and Health Survey 2014.

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. NAOMI MORAA MONARI,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 27 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Shah Md Atiqul Haq

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

If you are reporting a retrospective study of medical records or archived samples, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information.

Once you have amended this/these statement(s) in the Methods section of the manuscript, please add the same text to the “Ethics Statement” field of the submission form (via “Edit Submission”).

For additional information about PLOS ONE ethical requirements for human subjects research, please refer to http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-human-subjects-research.

3. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Authors,

I would ask you to revise the paper by following the reviewers' comments and suggestions.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The text is understandable, but before publishing it anywhere, it should be edited for English.

This is an elementary analysis with very little new information. I think the importance of marriage is probably misleading, since I suspect that a great number of these were premarital pregnancies. Also the arguments for the C Index values are not convincing.

Reviewer #2: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review this interesting article. As it has been noted, there is a dearth of recent literature exists addressing determinates of adolescents’ fertility in the context of Kenya. I hope my comments would be helpful to increase the quality of your work.

Abstract

• Please be specific on age 15-17 years old, it could be clarified as “current age 15-17 years “

• Add few more Key words which are relevant to your present study.

Background

• Do they have any recent studies on the determinates of fertility in the context of Kenya?

• It is not clear what do you really mean “These factors were varied from country to country and even within the 22 countries disparities still exist”, what sort of inequalities? Need a justification.

• There should be a proper discussion on what are the current research gaps in terms of fertility determinants in Kenya, it seems like jumping to the objectives without proving enough evidence/research gaps, what is the rationale and how this study could be benefited from bridge the gaps, and what would be the contribution of present study- one brief paragraph looking at this should be included.

• This sentese is not clear “Exploring the factors associated with teenage childbearing ensures targeted programs to this vulnerable population sub-group for policy makers and to aid in reducing the teen pregnancy incidence” So have you used the terms “teenage and adolescents” interchangeably?

Methods

• Methods section is clear; however, you may add an abbreviation terms somewhere for the convenience of the reader.

• Dependent variables need to be clearer, particularly, how you have been developed some of the covariates such as wealth index, etc, do they compatible with DHS?

Results:

• For all Tables include the sample size (n=)

• As according to the Table 3, as it has presented the disaggregation of fertility indexes by urban rural, what is the intention of doing so, this seems arbitrary, as this has not mentioned in the objectives.

Discussion

• So, do you mean that even after 20 years of Bledsoe and Cohen, 1993 analysis, still the fertility figures are same? Justify this.

• Discussion and conclusion sections are clear, it would be better to come up with separate section on strengths and limitations.

Acknowledgement

Why the author mentioned as “we”? Do you have any other author contributions?

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Gayathri Abeywickrama

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

27 Oct 2021

We wish to thank the academic editor and the two reviewers for their useful comments on our manuscript. We hope that we have satisfactory tackled all concerns raised and that the manuscript is now well suited for publication.

Submitted filename: RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS.docx

Click here for additional data file.

16 Dec 2021

Adolescent Fertility and its Determinants in Kenya: Evidence from Kenya Demographic and Health Survey 2014.

PONE-D-21-14209R1

Dear Dr.NAOMI MORAA MONARI,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Shah Md Atiqul Haq

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Dear authors,

Your paper is now accepted.

Reviewers' comments:

23 Dec 2021

PONE-D-21-14209R1

Adolescent Fertility and its Determinants in Kenya: Evidence from Kenya Demographic and Health Survey 2014.

Dear Dr. Monari:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Shah Md Atiqul Haq

Section Editor

PLOS ONE