Low Birth Weight Prevalence 2010
Low birth weight prevalence shows the percentage of newborns weighing less than 2,500 grams at birth.
Interactive Map
Complete Data Rankings
Rank | Actions | ||
|---|---|---|---|
1 | India | 29.999 % | |
2 | Bangladesh | 24.493 % | |
3 | Comoros | 24.386 % | |
4 | Guinea-Bissau | 22.24 % | |
5 | Nepal | 21.256 % | |
6 | Philippines | 21.127 % | |
7 | Liberia | 19.718 % | |
8 | Madagascar | 19.576 % | |
9 | Senegal | 19.487 % | |
10 | Mauritius | 19.311 % | |
11 | Burkina Faso | 19.259 % | |
12 | Côte d'Ivoire | 19.255 % | |
13 | Papua New Guinea | 18.845 % | |
14 | Sri Lanka | 18.656 % | |
15 | Mozambique | 18.351 % | |
16 | Benin | 17.707 % | |
17 | Botswana | 17.607 % | |
18 | Laos | 17.262 % | |
19 | Guyana | 16.882 % | |
20 | Timor-Leste | 16.733 % | |
21 | South Africa | 16.703 % | |
22 | Morocco | 16.493 % | |
23 | Jordan | 16.492 % | |
24 | Namibia | 16.078 % | |
25 | Angola | 15.85 % | |
26 | Malawi | 15.829 % | |
27 | Trinidad and Tobago | 15.749 % | |
28 | Saint Lucia | 15.73 % | |
29 | Central African Republic | 15.668 % | |
30 | Eritrea | 15.441 % | |
31 | Suriname | 15.426 % | |
32 | Togo | 15.3 % | |
33 | Burundi | 15.186 % | |
34 | Bahamas | 15.169 % | |
35 | Ghana | 15.108 % | |
36 | Gabon | 15.078 % | |
37 | Antigua and Barbuda | 14.942 % | |
38 | Lesotho | 14.768 % | |
39 | Jamaica | 14.467 % | |
40 | Turkey | 14.361 % | |
41 | Guatemala | 14.348 % | |
42 | Maldives | 13.804 % | |
43 | Gambia | 13.793 % | |
44 | United Arab Emirates | 13.722 % | |
45 | Palau | 13.698 % | |
46 | Oman | 13.332 % | |
47 | Solomon Islands | 13.214 % | |
48 | Brunei Darussalam | 13.046 % | |
49 | Cambodia | 12.985 % | |
50 | Cameroon | 12.946 % | |
51 | Malaysia | 12.83 % | |
52 | Myanmar | 12.665 % | |
53 | Vanuatu | 12.619 % | |
54 | Zimbabwe | 12.411 % | |
55 | Honduras | 12.302 % | |
56 | Seychelles | 12.295 % | |
57 | Zambia | 12.21 % | |
58 | Lebanon | 12.141 % | |
59 | Kuwait | 11.97 % | |
60 | Congo | 11.836 % | |
61 | Dominican Republic | 11.791 % | |
62 | Bhutan | 11.742 % | |
63 | Sierra Leone | 11.728 % | |
64 | Bahrain | 11.396 % | |
65 | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | 11.292 % | |
66 | Belize | 11.168 % | |
67 | Ecuador | 11.051 % | |
68 | Japan | 11.033 % | |
69 | Azerbaijan | 10.947 % | |
70 | Panama | 10.926 % | |
71 | Nicaragua | 10.904 % | |
72 | Kenya | 10.871 % | |
73 | Bulgaria | 10.807 % | |
74 | Tanzania | 10.744 % | |
75 | Iraq | 10.709 % | |
76 | Eswatini | 10.676 % | |
77 | Greece | 10.665 % | |
78 | Singapore | 10.618 % | |
79 | Indonesia | 10.599 % | |
80 | Sao Tome and Principe | 10.562 % | |
81 | Thailand | 10.551 % | |
82 | El Salvador | 10.427 % | |
83 | Colombia | 10.371 % | |
84 | Mexico | 10.151 % | |
85 | Paraguay | 10.036 % | |
86 | Qatar | 9.872 % | |
87 | State of Palestine | 9.72 % | |
88 | Romania | 9.602 % | |
89 | Israel | 9.494 % | |
90 | Kiribati | 9.417 % | |
91 | Tajikistan | 9.414 % | |
92 | Spain | 9.37 % | |
93 | Rwanda | 9.189 % | |
94 | Andorra | 9.033 % | |
95 | Venezuela | 8.936 % | |
96 | Peru | 8.627 % | |
97 | Costa Rica | 8.478 % | |
98 | Hungary | 8.427 % | |
99 | Bolivia | 8.412 % | |
100 | Brazil | 8.291 % | |
101 | Armenia | 8.253 % | |
102 | Portugal | 8.152 % | |
103 | North Macedonia | 8.143 % | |
104 | United States | 8.119 % | |
105 | Uruguay | 8.089 % | |
106 | Tunisia | 8.035 % | |
107 | Vietnam | 8.023 % | |
108 | France | 7.544 % | |
109 | Fiji | 7.403 % | |
110 | Slovakia | 7.396 % | |
111 | Luxembourg | 7.392 % | |
112 | Argentina | 7.248 % | |
113 | Russia | 7.235 % | |
114 | United Kingdom | 7.193 % | |
115 | Cuba | 7.184 % | |
116 | Czech Republic | 7.166 % | |
117 | Monaco | 7.136 % | |
118 | Belgium | 7.016 % | |
119 | Italy | 6.99 % | |
120 | Malta | 6.907 % | |
121 | Algeria | 6.863 % | |
122 | Germany | 6.854 % | |
123 | Georgia | 6.819 % | |
124 | Austria | 6.745 % | |
125 | Kyrgyzstan | 6.508 % | |
126 | Republic of Moldova | 6.506 % | |
127 | Montenegro | 6.384 % | |
128 | Australia | 6.369 % | |
129 | Switzerland | 6.363 % | |
130 | Netherlands | 6.167 % | |
131 | Canada | 6.143 % | |
132 | Slovenia | 6.108 % | |
133 | New Zealand | 6.054 % | |
134 | Mongolia | 6.038 % | |
135 | South Korea | 5.995 % | |
136 | Serbia | 5.991 % | |
137 | Albania | 5.98 % | |
138 | Chile | 5.975 % | |
139 | Ukraine | 5.957 % | |
140 | Kazakhstan | 5.816 % | |
141 | Poland | 5.796 % | |
142 | Uzbekistan | 5.786 % | |
143 | Ireland | 5.344 % | |
144 | China | 5.183 % | |
145 | Denmark | 5.155 % | |
146 | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 5.145 % | |
147 | Turkmenistan | 5.053 % | |
148 | Belarus | 5.024 % | |
149 | Croatia | 5.011 % | |
150 | Norway | 4.794 % | |
151 | Lithuania | 4.686 % | |
152 | Latvia | 4.61 % | |
153 | Estonia | 4.455 % | |
154 | Sweden | 4.231 % | |
155 | Finland | 4.127 % | |
156 | San Marino | 4.001 % | |
157 | Iceland | 3.77 % |
- #1
India
- #2
Bangladesh
- #3
Comoros
- #4
Guinea-Bissau
- #5
Nepal
- #6
Philippines
- #7
Liberia
- #8
Madagascar
- #9
Senegal
- #10
Mauritius
Analysis: These countries represent the highest values in this dataset, showcasing significant scale and impact on global statistics.
- #157
Iceland
- #156
San Marino
- #155
Finland
- #154
Sweden
- #153
Estonia
- #152
Latvia
- #151
Lithuania
- #150
Norway
- #149
Croatia
- #148
Belarus
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
In 2010, India had the highest Low Birth Weight Prevalence at nearly 30%, while Iceland recorded the lowest at approximately 3.77%. The global range of low birth weight prevalence spanned from 3.77% to 30.00% across 157 countries. The average prevalence worldwide was 11.06%, providing a critical benchmark for understanding the distribution of this health indicator.
Socioeconomic Factors Influencing High Prevalence
The data highlights a significant disparity in Low Birth Weight Prevalence between countries, particularly reflecting socioeconomic conditions. Countries like India (29.99%), Bangladesh (24.49%), and Comoros (24.38%) exhibit some of the highest rates. These nations often face challenges such as poverty, limited access to healthcare, and nutritional deficiencies, which are well-documented contributors to low birth weight.
Conversely, countries with robust healthcare systems and higher living standards, such as Iceland (3.77%) and San Marino (4.00%), show the lowest prevalence. These nations benefit from comprehensive maternal health services and higher nutritional awareness, which significantly reduce the risk of low birth weight.
Geographical and Environmental Influences
Geographical location and environmental conditions also play a crucial role in low birth weight statistics. For instance, countries in South Asia like Nepal (21.25%) and the Philippines (21.13%) are among the top ten with high prevalence. These regions often experience natural challenges such as monsoons and floods, which can disrupt food supply and healthcare access, further impacting birth outcomes.
In contrast, Nordic countries such as Sweden (4.23%) and Finland (4.13%) benefit from stable climates and developed infrastructure, facilitating consistent access to healthcare and nutrition, thereby lowering the prevalence of low birth weight.
Year-over-Year Trends and Significant Changes
The year-over-year data indicates minimal average changes globally, with a negligible average change of -0.01%. However, some countries experienced notable shifts. Jordan saw the largest increase of 0.23% (1.4%), which may reflect changes in healthcare policies or economic conditions impacting maternal care.
On the other hand, India registered a decrease of 0.26% (-0.8%), suggesting possible improvements in healthcare access or nutritional interventions. Similarly, Guinea-Bissau and Senegal reported decreases of 0.24% and 0.21% respectively, indicating progress in addressing factors contributing to low birth weight.
Policy Implications and Future Directions
The disparities in Low Birth Weight Prevalence underscore the need for targeted policy interventions. Countries with high prevalence rates must prioritize maternal health programs, improve nutritional standards, and enhance healthcare accessibility. For instance, policies focused on prenatal care and nutritional support in India and Bangladesh could significantly reduce their prevalence rates.
Moreover, successful strategies from countries with low prevalence, such as those in the Nordics, could serve as models. Implementing comprehensive maternal health policies and ensuring stable healthcare funding are crucial steps toward reducing low birth weight prevalence globally.
Frequently Asked Questions About Low Birth Weight Prevalence in 2010
Which country had the highest prevalence of low birth weight in 2010?
India had the highest prevalence of low birth weight in 2010, with 30% of newborns weighing less than 2,500 grams.
Which country had the lowest prevalence of low birth weight in 2010?
Iceland had the lowest prevalence of low birth weight in 2010, with 3.77% of newborns weighing less than 2,500 grams.
What was the average prevalence of low birth weight across countries in 2010?
The average prevalence of low birth weight across the 157 countries in 2010 was 11.06%.
What was the median prevalence of low birth weight in 2010?
The median prevalence of low birth weight in 2010 was 10.6%.
Which countries were in the top 10 for low birth weight prevalence in 2010?
The top 10 countries for low birth weight prevalence in 2010 were India, Bangladesh, Comoros, Guinea-Bissau, Nepal, Philippines, Liberia, Madagascar, Senegal, and Mauritius.
Which countries were in the bottom 10 for low birth weight prevalence in 2010?
The bottom 10 countries for low birth weight prevalence in 2010 were Iceland, San Marino, Finland, Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Croatia, and Belarus.
Insights by country
Lesotho
In 2010, Lesotho had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 14.768033 %, ranking #38 out of 157 countries. This figure is notably higher than the global average, indicating significant health challenges. Contributing factors include high rates of poverty and malnutrition, compounded by the impact of HIV/AIDS, which affects maternal health and nutrition in the country.
Japan
In 2010, Japan had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 11.033009 %, ranking #68 out of 157 countries. This figure is notably higher than the global average, indicating challenges in maternal and infant health. Contributing factors include Japan's aging population, which often leads to higher rates of low birth weight due to increased maternal age, and the country's unique healthcare policies that may not fully address these demographic shifts.
Denmark
In 2010, Denmark had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 5.1546664 %, ranking #145 out of 157 countries. This figure is higher than the global average, indicating potential health challenges within the population. Contributing factors may include the country's focus on maternal health policies, access to healthcare, and socioeconomic conditions that influence pregnancy outcomes.
Lebanon
In 2010, Lebanon recorded a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 12.140975 %, ranking #58 out of 157 countries. This figure is above the global average, indicating a significant health concern in the region. Contributing factors include ongoing economic challenges, which affect maternal health services, and the impact of regional conflicts that disrupt healthcare access and prenatal care. Additionally, demographic trends such as urbanization may also influence birth weight outcomes.
Jordan
In 2010, Jordan had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 16.491919 %, ranking #23 out of 157 countries. This figure is notably higher than the global average, indicating significant health challenges. Contributing factors include economic constraints and limited access to healthcare services, particularly in rural areas, which affect maternal nutrition and prenatal care.
Malawi
In 2010, Malawi had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 15.829339 %, ranking #26 out of 157 countries. This prevalence is notably higher than the global average, which indicates a significant public health concern. Contributing factors include high rates of maternal malnutrition and limited access to healthcare services, which are exacerbated by economic challenges and a high prevalence of diseases such as HIV/AIDS.
Singapore
In 2010, Singapore had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 10.617559 %, ranking #78 out of 157 countries. This figure is higher than the global average, reflecting challenges that the nation faces in maternal health. Contributing factors include the high cost of living, which can lead to delayed pregnancies and a focus on career over family, as well as the urban environment that may limit access to prenatal care for some populations.
Zimbabwe
In 2010, Zimbabwe had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 12.411165 %, ranking #54 out of 157 countries. This prevalence is notably higher than the global average, indicating significant public health challenges. Contributing factors include economic instability, limited access to healthcare, and high rates of malnutrition among pregnant women, all of which adversely affect maternal and infant health outcomes.
Fiji
In 2010, Fiji had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 7.4026356 %, ranking #109 out of 157 countries. This figure is higher than the global average, indicating challenges in maternal health compared to many other nations. Contributing factors include limited access to healthcare services in rural areas and socioeconomic disparities that affect nutrition and prenatal care.
Bolivia
In 2010, Bolivia had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 8.412333 %, ranking #99 out of 157 countries. This prevalence is higher than the global average, indicating significant health challenges. Contributing factors include Bolivia's economic constraints, which limit access to quality prenatal care, and high rates of maternal malnutrition, particularly in rural areas. Additionally, geographic barriers in mountainous regions hinder healthcare delivery, exacerbating the issue.
Data Source
Share of babies born with a low birthweight, 2020
Our World in Data is a research organization that provides comprehensive data and visualizations on global development issues, including health, education, and economic indicators. The dataset on the share of babies born with low birthweight in 2020 offers country-level statistics that highlight variations in maternal and infant health outcomes across different regions.
Visit Data SourceHistorical Data by Year
Explore Low Birth Weight Prevalence data across different years. Compare trends and see how statistics have changed over time.