Background
Reduction of multidimensional poverty and tuberculosis are priority development agenda worldwide. The SDGs aims to eradicate poverty in all forms (SDG 1.2) and to end tuberculosis (SDG 3.3.2) by 2030. While poverty is increasingly being measured across multiple domains, reduction of tuberculosis has been an integral part of public health programmes. Though literature suggests a higher prevalence of tuberculosis among the economically poor, no attempt has been made to understand the association between multidimensional poverty and tuberculosis in India. The objective of this paper is to examine the association of multidimensional poverty and tuberculosis in India.
Methods
The unit data from the National Family Health Survey-4, conducted in 2015–16 covering 628,900 households and 2,869,043 individuals across 36 states and union territories of India was used in the analysis. The survey collected information on the self-reported tuberculosis infection of each member of a sample household at the time of the survey. Multidimensional poverty was measured in the domains of education, health, and standard of living, with a set of 10 indicators. The prevalence of tuberculosis was estimated among the multidimensional poor and non-poor populations across the states of India. A binary logistic regression model was used to understand the association of tuberculosis and multidimensional poverty.
Results
Results suggest that about 29.3% population of India was multidimensional poor and that the multidimensional poverty index was 0.128. The prevalence of tuberculosis among the multidimensional poor was 480 (95% CI: 464–496) per 100,000 population compared to 250 (95% CI: 238–262) among the multidimensional non-poor. The prevalence of tuberculosis among the multidimensional poor was the highest in the state of Kerala (1590) and the lowest in the state of Himachal Pradesh (220). Our findings suggest a significantly higher prevalence of tuberculosis among the multidimensional poor compared to the multidimensional non-poor in most of the states in India. The odds of having tuberculosis among the multidimensional poor were 1.82 times higher (95% CI, 1.73–1.90) compared to the non-poor. Age, sex, smoking, crowded living conditions, caste, religion, and place of residence are significant socio-demographic risk factors of tuberculosis.
Conclusion
The prevalence of tuberculosis is significantly higher among the multidimensional poor compared to the multidimensional non-poor in India.
The paper attempts to develop a probability model for first birth interval incorporating incidence of foetal wastages prior to live birth and the phenomenon of physical separation which are still prevalent in many developing societies. The fact that fecundability varies considerably over a random group of females is also taken into account. Estimates of certain parameters of the model have been obtained by utilizing a real set of data on the time of first complete conception.
This paper introduces a new class of Balakrishnan distribution by extending the multimodal skew-normal distribution proposed by Chakraborty et al. (2015). Statistical properties of the new family of distributions are studied in detail. In particular, explicit expressions of the density and distribution function, moments, skewness, kurtosis and the moments generating function are derived. Furthermore, estimation of the parameters using the maximum likelihood method of the new family of distributions is considered. Finally, the paper ends with an illustration of real-life data sets and then comparing the value of Akaike Information Criterion and Bayesian information criterion of the new distribution with some other known distributions. For the nested models, the Likelihood Ratio Test is carried out.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.