Low Birth Weight Prevalence 2013
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 | 29.224 % | |
2 | Bangladesh | 24.178 % | |
3 | Comoros | 23.994 % | |
4 | Guinea-Bissau | 21.526 % | |
5 | Philippines | 21.175 % | |
6 | Nepal | 20.749 % | |
7 | Liberia | 19.672 % | |
8 | Madagascar | 19.436 % | |
9 | Papua New Guinea | 19.078 % | |
10 | Mauritius | 19.041 % | |
11 | Côte d'Ivoire | 19.016 % | |
12 | Burkina Faso | 18.987 % | |
13 | Senegal | 18.898 % | |
14 | Sri Lanka | 18.383 % | |
15 | Mozambique | 18.03 % | |
16 | Benin | 17.35 % | |
17 | Jordan | 17.184 % | |
18 | Botswana | 17.174 % | |
19 | Laos | 17.164 % | |
20 | Timor-Leste | 17.03 % | |
21 | Guyana | 17.019 % | |
22 | South Africa | 16.61 % | |
23 | Central African Republic | 16.091 % | |
24 | Trinidad and Tobago | 15.996 % | |
25 | Saint Lucia | 15.984 % | |
26 | Morocco | 15.947 % | |
27 | Malawi | 15.823 % | |
28 | Namibia | 15.808 % | |
29 | Suriname | 15.784 % | |
30 | Angola | 15.605 % | |
31 | Eritrea | 15.362 % | |
32 | Bahamas | 15.309 % | |
33 | Antigua and Barbuda | 15.141 % | |
34 | Burundi | 15.036 % | |
35 | Togo | 14.948 % | |
36 | Gabon | 14.851 % | |
37 | Ghana | 14.793 % | |
38 | Lesotho | 14.763 % | |
39 | Guatemala | 14.449 % | |
40 | Jamaica | 14.279 % | |
41 | United Arab Emirates | 13.92 % | |
42 | Turkey | 13.839 % | |
43 | Maldives | 13.833 % | |
44 | Gambia | 13.666 % | |
45 | Palau | 13.662 % | |
46 | Oman | 13.316 % | |
47 | Brunei Darussalam | 13.277 % | |
48 | Solomon Islands | 13.235 % | |
49 | Malaysia | 13.108 % | |
50 | Cameroon | 12.825 % | |
51 | Vanuatu | 12.791 % | |
52 | Myanmar | 12.661 % | |
53 | Kuwait | 12.645 % | |
54 | Honduras | 12.638 % | |
55 | Cambodia | 12.547 % | |
56 | Seychelles | 12.359 % | |
57 | Dominican Republic | 12.271 % | |
58 | Lebanon | 12.258 % | |
59 | Zimbabwe | 12.111 % | |
60 | Zambia | 11.966 % | |
61 | Bhutan | 11.694 % | |
62 | Bahrain | 11.686 % | |
63 | Congo | 11.552 % | |
64 | Belize | 11.308 % | |
65 | Sierra Leone | 11.212 % | |
66 | Japan | 11.059 % | |
67 | Bulgaria | 11.034 % | |
68 | Greece | 11.013 % | |
69 | Azerbaijan | 10.994 % | |
70 | Congo, Democratic Republic of the | 10.916 % | |
71 | Ecuador | 10.851 % | |
72 | Iraq | 10.795 % | |
73 | Kenya | 10.708 % | |
74 | Sao Tome and Principe | 10.7 % | |
75 | Singapore | 10.656 % | |
76 | Panama | 10.656 % | |
77 | Nicaragua | 10.651 % | |
78 | Eswatini | 10.55 % | |
79 | Colombia | 10.53 % | |
80 | Thailand | 10.511 % | |
81 | Indonesia | 10.434 % | |
82 | Tanzania | 10.389 % | |
83 | El Salvador | 10.369 % | |
84 | Mexico | 10.159 % | |
85 | Paraguay | 10.01 % | |
86 | Qatar | 9.911 % | |
87 | State of Palestine | 9.901 % | |
88 | Spain | 9.569 % | |
89 | Romania | 9.435 % | |
90 | Israel | 9.345 % | |
91 | Rwanda | 9.325 % | |
92 | Kiribati | 9.232 % | |
93 | Tajikistan | 9.217 % | |
94 | Andorra | 9.198 % | |
95 | Venezuela | 8.998 % | |
96 | Costa Rica | 8.541 % | |
97 | Portugal | 8.452 % | |
98 | Hungary | 8.447 % | |
99 | Brazil | 8.383 % | |
100 | Armenia | 8.289 % | |
101 | Bolivia | 8.256 % | |
102 | North Macedonia | 8.198 % | |
103 | Peru | 8.194 % | |
104 | United States | 8.166 % | |
105 | Tunisia | 8.121 % | |
106 | Uruguay | 7.991 % | |
107 | Luxembourg | 7.561 % | |
108 | Slovakia | 7.548 % | |
109 | France | 7.533 % | |
110 | Vietnam | 7.454 % | |
111 | Fiji | 7.417 % | |
112 | Czech Republic | 7.365 % | |
113 | Argentina | 7.262 % | |
114 | Russia | 7.262 % | |
115 | Cuba | 7.198 % | |
116 | Italy | 7.147 % | |
117 | United Kingdom | 7.107 % | |
118 | Monaco | 7.015 % | |
119 | Malta | 6.997 % | |
120 | Georgia | 6.975 % | |
121 | Algeria | 6.958 % | |
122 | Belgium | 6.957 % | |
123 | Germany | 6.857 % | |
124 | Austria | 6.647 % | |
125 | Republic of Moldova | 6.512 % | |
126 | Australia | 6.434 % | |
127 | South Korea | 6.388 % | |
128 | Switzerland | 6.383 % | |
129 | Montenegro | 6.366 % | |
130 | Kyrgyzstan | 6.353 % | |
131 | Canada | 6.289 % | |
132 | Slovenia | 6.228 % | |
133 | Chile | 6.207 % | |
134 | Serbia | 6.076 % | |
135 | Netherlands | 6.01 % | |
136 | New Zealand | 6.003 % | |
137 | Albania | 5.964 % | |
138 | Ukraine | 5.963 % | |
139 | Uzbekistan | 5.877 % | |
140 | Poland | 5.781 % | |
141 | Kazakhstan | 5.633 % | |
142 | Mongolia | 5.587 % | |
143 | Ireland | 5.499 % | |
144 | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 5.17 % | |
145 | China | 5.093 % | |
146 | Denmark | 5.055 % | |
147 | Croatia | 5.055 % | |
148 | Belarus | 5.04 % | |
149 | Turkmenistan | 4.826 % | |
150 | Norway | 4.696 % | |
151 | Lithuania | 4.692 % | |
152 | Latvia | 4.511 % | |
153 | Estonia | 4.455 % | |
154 | Sweden | 4.214 % | |
155 | Finland | 4.135 % | |
156 | San Marino | 4.108 % | |
157 | Iceland | 3.834 % |
- #1
India
- #2
Bangladesh
- #3
Comoros
- #4
Guinea-Bissau
- #5
Philippines
- #6
Nepal
- #7
Liberia
- #8
Madagascar
- #9
Papua New Guinea
- #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
Turkmenistan
- #148
Belarus
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
In 2013, India recorded the highest Low Birth Weight Prevalence at 29.22%, while the global range spanned from 3.83% to 29.22%. The global average for low birth weight prevalence was 11.03%, providing a crucial benchmark for understanding the health challenges faced by newborns worldwide.
Economic Factors Driving High Prevalence
The economic landscape of a country plays a significant role in the prevalence of low birth weight. In countries like India and Bangladesh, where low birth weight prevalence is notably high at 29.22% and 24.18% respectively, economic challenges often correlate with inadequate maternal nutrition and healthcare access. These factors are well-documented contributors to low birth weight. In contrast, countries with stronger economies and healthcare systems, such as Iceland and Finland, demonstrate much lower prevalence rates of 3.83% and 4.13%, respectively.
Geographic and Demographic Influences
Geographic and demographic factors also influence low birth weight prevalence. In Comoros and Guinea-Bissau, with prevalence rates of 23.99% and 21.53%, the combination of remote locations and limited healthcare infrastructure poses significant challenges. These countries often face logistical barriers in delivering healthcare services to pregnant women, exacerbating the risk of low birth weight. Conversely, nations like Sweden and Norway, with rates of 4.21% and 4.70%, benefit from robust healthcare systems and comprehensive maternal care policies.
Policy Impact on Low Birth Weight Reduction
Government policies aimed at improving maternal health can significantly reduce low birth weight prevalence. Countries such as Nepal and Philippines, with high prevalence rates of 20.75% and 21.18%, have initiated programs to enhance maternal nutrition and healthcare access. These initiatives are vital in addressing the high percentages and improving neonatal outcomes. In contrast, nations with lower prevalence, like Estonia and Latvia, at 4.46% and 4.51%, benefit from established health policies ensuring prenatal care and education.
Year-Over-Year Trends and Notable Changes
The average global change in low birth weight prevalence from previous years was a slight decrease of -0.01% (-0.1%), indicating overall stability. However, specific countries experienced significant shifts. Kuwait saw an increase of 0.24% (1.9%), highlighting potential areas for policy intervention. Conversely, India and Guinea-Bissau experienced decreases of -0.27% (-0.9%) and -0.24% (-1.1%), respectively, suggesting effective health interventions. Notably, Vietnam achieved a reduction of -0.19% (-2.4%), showcasing the impact of targeted healthcare improvements.
Understanding the factors influencing low birth weight prevalence is crucial for global health policy development. Economic conditions, geographic accessibility, and effective health policies are key determinants. By analyzing data and trends, countries can strategize to reduce low birth weight rates, ultimately improving neonatal health outcomes worldwide.
Frequently Asked Questions About Low Birth Weight Prevalence in 2013
Which country had the highest prevalence of low birth weight in 2013?
India had the highest prevalence of low birth weight in 2013, with 29.22% of newborns weighing less than 2,500 grams.
Which country had the lowest prevalence of low birth weight in 2013?
Iceland had the lowest prevalence of low birth weight in 2013, with 3.83% of newborns weighing less than 2,500 grams.
What was the average prevalence of low birth weight across countries in 2013?
The average prevalence of low birth weight across the 157 countries in 2013 was 11.03%.
What was the median prevalence of low birth weight in 2013?
The median prevalence of low birth weight in 2013 was 10.53%.
Which countries were in the top 3 for low birth weight prevalence in 2013?
The top 3 countries for low birth weight prevalence in 2013 were India (29.22%), Bangladesh (24.18%), and Comoros (23.99%).
What was the range of low birth weight prevalence in 2013?
In 2013, the range of low birth weight prevalence was from 3.83% in Iceland to 29.22% in India.
Insights by country
Tunisia
Tunisia ranked #105 out of 157 countries in 2013 for Low Birth Weight Prevalence, with a rate of 8.120923 %. This figure is higher than the global average, indicating challenges in maternal health compared to countries with better healthcare systems. Contributing factors include economic constraints, which limit access to quality prenatal care, and regional disparities in healthcare services that affect rural populations disproportionately.
Malaysia
In 2013, Malaysia reported a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 13.107508 %, ranking #49 out of 157 countries. This figure is notably higher than the global average, indicating potential health challenges within the population. Contributing factors include socioeconomic disparities, access to maternal healthcare, and nutritional deficiencies among pregnant women, which can affect fetal development and birth outcomes.
Iceland
In 2013, Iceland had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 3.8342316 %, ranking #157 out of 157 countries. This prevalence is notably higher than many of its Nordic neighbors, which typically report lower rates due to robust healthcare systems. Factors contributing to this statistic in Iceland include geographical isolation, which may affect access to specialized maternal health services, and a relatively small population that can lead to variability in health outcomes.
Dominican Republic
The Dominican Republic ranked #57 globally for Low Birth Weight Prevalence in 2013, with a rate of 12.271315 %. This figure is higher than the global average, indicating a significant public health concern. Contributing factors include limited access to prenatal care and socioeconomic challenges that affect maternal health, particularly in rural areas where healthcare resources are scarce.
Andorra
In 2013, Andorra had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 9.198481 %, ranking #94 out of 157 countries. This figure is higher than the global average, indicating potential health challenges compared to better-performing nations. Contributing factors may include Andorra's small population size, which can lead to variability in health outcomes, as well as limited healthcare resources in a mountainous region that affects prenatal care accessibility.
Bolivia
In 2013, Bolivia had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 8.255839 %, ranking #101 out of 157 countries. This figure is notably higher than the global average, indicating challenges in maternal health and nutrition. Contributing factors include Bolivia's high rates of poverty and limited access to healthcare services, particularly in rural areas, which can impact prenatal care and nutrition for expectant mothers.
Malawi
In 2013, Malawi had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 15.822638 %, ranking #27 out of 157 countries. This figure is notably higher than the global average, indicating significant health challenges within the nation. Contributing factors include high rates of maternal malnutrition, limited access to healthcare, and economic constraints that affect prenatal care. Additionally, Malawi's agricultural dependency often leads to food insecurity, exacerbating health outcomes for expectant mothers.
Vanuatu
In 2013, Vanuatu had a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 12.790633 %, ranking #51 out of 157 countries. This prevalence is higher than the global average, indicating potential health challenges within the region. Contributing factors include limited access to healthcare services in remote areas and economic constraints that affect maternal nutrition and prenatal care.
State of Palestine
In 2013, the State of Palestine recorded a Low Birth Weight Prevalence of 9.900857 %, ranking #87 out of 157 countries. This prevalence is higher than the global average, indicating potential health challenges in maternal and infant care. Contributing factors include limited access to healthcare services due to ongoing political instability and economic constraints, which can adversely affect prenatal nutrition and healthcare access.
Cuba
Cuba's Low Birth Weight Prevalence in 2013 was 7.1975527 %, ranking #115 out of 157 countries. This figure is notably higher than that of neighboring countries like the Dominican Republic, which has implemented robust maternal health programs. Key drivers of Cuba's low birth weight rates include its comprehensive healthcare system, which emphasizes prenatal care, and socio-economic conditions that support maternal nutrition and education.
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.