Low Birth Weight Rate 2009
Low birth weight rate highlights newborns under 2,500 grams, affecting survival and health outcomes.
Interactive Map
Complete Data Rankings
Rank | Actions | ||
|---|---|---|---|
1 |  India | 30.255 % | |
2 |  Bangladesh | 24.598 % | |
3 |  Comoros | 24.519 % | |
4 |  Guinea-Bissau | 22.485 % | |
5 |  Nepal | 21.439 % | |
6 |  Philippines | 21.09 % | |
7 |  Liberia | 19.736 % | |
8 |  Senegal | 19.7 % | |
9 |  Madagascar | 19.604 % | |
10 |  Mauritius | 19.386 % | |
11 |  Burkina Faso | 19.345 % | |
12 |  Côte d'Ivoire | 19.286 % | |
13 |  Sri Lanka | 18.761 % | |
14 |  Papua New Guinea | 18.758 % | |
15 |  Mozambique | 18.489 % | |
16 |  Benin | 17.813 % | |
17 |  Botswana | 17.754 % | |
18 |  Laos | 17.29 % | |
19 |  Timor-Leste | 16.834 % | |
20 |  Guyana | 16.827 % | |
21 |  South Africa | 16.75 % | |
22 |  Morocco | 16.681 % | |
23 |  Jordan | 16.265 % | |
24 |  Namibia | 16.137 % | |
25 |  Angola | 15.946 % | |
26 |  Malawi | 15.87 % | |
27 |  Trinidad and Tobago | 15.655 % | |
28 |  Central African Republic | 15.624 % | |
29 |  Saint Lucia | 15.614 % | |
30 |  Eritrea | 15.477 % | |
31 |  Togo | 15.412 % | |
32 |  Suriname | 15.299 % | |
33 |  Burundi | 15.238 % | |
34 |  Ghana | 15.231 % | |
35 |  Gabon | 15.109 % | |
36 |  Bahamas | 15.106 % | |
37 |  Antigua and Barbuda | 14.851 % | |
38 |  Lesotho | 14.769 % | |
39 |  Turkey | 14.51 % | |
40 |  Jamaica | 14.506 % | |
41 |  Guatemala | 14.3 % | |
42 |  Gambia | 13.862 % | |
43 |  Maldives | 13.799 % | |
44 |  Palau | 13.688 % | |
45 |  United Arab Emirates | 13.577 % | |
46 |  Oman | 13.331 % | |
47 |  Solomon Islands | 13.2 % | |
48 |  Cambodia | 13.116 % | |
49 |  Cameroon | 12.981 % | |
50 |  Brunei Darussalam | 12.966 % | |
51 |  Malaysia | 12.736 % | |
52 |  Myanmar | 12.623 % | |
53 |  Vanuatu | 12.571 % | |
54 |  Zimbabwe | 12.555 % | |
55 |  Zambia | 12.296 % | |
56 |  Seychelles | 12.27 % | |
57 |  Honduras | 12.175 % | |
58 |  Lebanon | 12.156 % | |
59 |  Congo | 11.951 % | |
60 |  Sierra Leone | 11.904 % | |
61 |  Kuwait | 11.764 % | |
62 |  Bhutan | 11.761 % | |
63 |  Dominican Republic | 11.63 % | |
64 |  Congo, Democratic Republic of the | 11.414 % | |
65 |  Bahrain | 11.256 % | |
66 |  Belize | 11.117 % | |
67 |  Ecuador | 11.106 % | |
68 |  Japan | 11.026 % | |
69 |  Panama | 11.011 % | |
70 |  Nicaragua | 10.96 % | |
71 |  Azerbaijan | 10.946 % | |
72 |  Kenya | 10.937 % | |
73 |  Tanzania | 10.857 % | |
74 |  Bulgaria | 10.734 % | |
75 |  Eswatini | 10.698 % | |
76 |  Iraq | 10.671 % | |
77 |  Indonesia | 10.631 % | |
78 |  Singapore | 10.61 % | |
79 |  Thailand | 10.59 % | |
80 |  Greece | 10.541 % | |
81 |  Sao Tome and Principe | 10.517 % | |
82 |  El Salvador | 10.444 % | |
83 |  Colombia | 10.302 % | |
84 |  Mexico | 10.139 % | |
85 |  Paraguay | 10.045 % | |
86 |  Qatar | 9.865 % | |
87 |  State of Palestine | 9.658 % | |
88 |  Romania | 9.654 % | |
89 |  Israel | 9.538 % | |
90 |  Tajikistan | 9.486 % | |
91 |  Kiribati | 9.416 % | |
92 |  Spain | 9.287 % | |
93 |  Rwanda | 9.115 % | |
94 |  Andorra | 8.979 % | |
95 |  Venezuela | 8.919 % | |
96 |  Peru | 8.785 % | |
97 |  Bolivia | 8.459 % | |
98 |  Costa Rica | 8.456 % | |
99 |  Hungary | 8.411 % | |
100 |  Brazil | 8.273 % | |
101 |  Armenia | 8.231 % | |
102 |  Vietnam | 8.22 % | |
103 |  Uruguay | 8.138 % | |
104 |  North Macedonia | 8.129 % | |
105 |  United States | 8.094 % | |
106 |  Portugal | 8.051 % | |
107 |  Tunisia | 8.012 % | |
108 |  France | 7.548 % | |
109 |  Fiji | 7.395 % | |
110 |  Slovakia | 7.349 % | |
111 |  Luxembourg | 7.317 % | |
112 |  Argentina | 7.264 % | |
113 |  Russia | 7.231 % | |
114 |  United Kingdom | 7.212 % | |
115 |  Cuba | 7.169 % | |
116 |  Monaco | 7.165 % | |
117 |  Czech Republic | 7.094 % | |
118 |  Belgium | 7.028 % | |
119 |  Italy | 6.932 % | |
120 |  Malta | 6.873 % | |
121 |  Algeria | 6.839 % | |
122 |  Germany | 6.833 % | |
123 |  Austria | 6.766 % | |
124 |  Georgia | 6.754 % | |
125 |  Kyrgyzstan | 6.56 % | |
126 |  Republic of Moldova | 6.501 % | |
127 |  Montenegro | 6.384 % | |
128 |  Switzerland | 6.353 % | |
129 |  Australia | 6.346 % | |
130 |  Netherlands | 6.227 % | |
131 |  Mongolia | 6.198 % | |
132 |  Canada | 6.091 % | |
133 |  Slovenia | 6.067 % | |
134 |  New Zealand | 6.064 % | |
135 |  Albania | 5.981 % | |
136 |  Serbia | 5.962 % | |
137 |  Ukraine | 5.947 % | |
138 |  Chile | 5.903 % | |
139 |  South Korea | 5.876 % | |
140 |  Kazakhstan | 5.872 % | |
141 |  Poland | 5.807 % | |
142 |  Uzbekistan | 5.758 % | |
143 |  Ireland | 5.259 % | |
144 |  China | 5.224 % | |
145 |  Denmark | 5.18 % | |
146 |  Turkmenistan | 5.131 % | |
147 |  Bosnia and Herzegovina | 5.13 % | |
148 |  Belarus | 5.031 % | |
149 |  Croatia | 4.99 % | |
150 |  Norway | 4.818 % | |
151 |  Lithuania | 4.673 % | |
152 |  Latvia | 4.629 % | |
153 |  Estonia | 4.432 % | |
154 |  Sweden | 4.233 % | |
155 |  Finland | 4.131 % | |
156 |  San Marino | 3.972 % | |
157 |  Iceland | 3.754 % |
- #1India
- #2Bangladesh
- #3Comoros
- #4Guinea-Bissau
- #5Nepal
- #6Philippines
- #7Liberia
- #8Senegal
- #9Madagascar
- #10Mauritius
Analysis: These countries represent the highest values in this dataset, showcasing significant scale and impact on global statistics.
- #157Iceland
- #156San Marino
- #155Finland
- #154Sweden
- #153Estonia
- #152Latvia
- #151Lithuania
- #150Norway
- #149Croatia
- #148Belarus
Context: These countries or territories have the lowest values, often due to geographic size, administrative status, or specific characteristics.
Analysis & Context
In 2009, the country with the highest Low Birth Weight Rate was India at 30.25%, while Iceland reported the lowest at 3.75%. The global range for this metric spanned from 3.75% to 30.25%. The average Low Birth Weight Rate across the 157 countries with available data was 11.07%, providing a benchmark for international comparisons.
Socioeconomic Factors Influencing Low Birth Weight Rates
The prevalence of low birth weight is often intertwined with socioeconomic conditions. Countries like India and Bangladesh, with rates of 30.25% and 24.60% respectively, face challenges such as poverty, limited access to healthcare, and higher rates of maternal malnutrition. These factors contribute significantly to the elevated rates of low birth weight.
Conversely, countries with robust healthcare systems and higher socioeconomic standings, such as Iceland at 3.75% and San Marino at 3.97%, benefit from comprehensive prenatal care and better maternal health, resulting in lower incidences of low birth weight.
Geographic and Environmental Impacts
Geographic and environmental factors also play a crucial role. In Comoros and Guinea-Bissau, with rates of 24.52% and 22.49% respectively, geographic isolation and environmental challenges can hinder access to healthcare services, impacting maternal and newborn health outcomes.
In contrast, Nordic countries such as Finland and Sweden, with rates of 4.13% and 4.23%, benefit from centralized healthcare policies and environmental stability, which contribute to lower rates of low birth weight.
Policy and Healthcare Interventions
Effective policy interventions are vital in reducing low birth weight rates. Countries with lower rates, such as Norway at 4.82% and Estonia at 4.43%, often have policies promoting maternal health, including access to prenatal vitamins, maternal education, and healthcare subsidies.
In contrast, countries with higher rates, like Liberia at 19.74% and Senegal at 19.70%, may lack the resources or infrastructure to implement effective maternal health policies, impacting the prevalence of low birth weight.
Year-over-Year Trends and Changes
Analyzing year-over-year trends, India showed a notable decrease, with a reduction of 0.26% in its Low Birth Weight Rate. This change may be attributed to modest improvements in maternal healthcare and nutrition programs. Similarly, Guinea-Bissau and Senegal experienced declines of 0.24% and 0.23% respectively, indicating progress in addressing maternal health issues.
Conversely, countries like Jordan and Kuwait saw increases of 0.20% and 0.19%, respectively. These increases might reflect challenges in healthcare access or socioeconomic disruptions, affecting maternal and infant health outcomes.
The analysis of Low Birth Weight Rates in 2009 reveals significant disparities driven by socioeconomic, geographic, and policy factors. Understanding these influences is crucial for international efforts to improve maternal and child health outcomes globally.
Frequently Asked Questions About Low Birth Weight Rate in 2009
Which country had the highest low birth weight rate in 2009?
India had the highest low birth weight rate in 2009, with a rate of 30.25%.
Which country had the lowest low birth weight rate in 2009?
Iceland had the lowest low birth weight rate in 2009, with a rate of 3.75%.
What was the average low birth weight rate across countries in 2009?
The average low birth weight rate across the 157 countries in 2009 was 11.07%.
What was the median low birth weight rate in 2009?
The median low birth weight rate in 2009 was 10.59%.
Which countries were in the top 3 for low birth weight rates in 2009?
The top 3 countries for low birth weight rates in 2009 were India (30.25%), Bangladesh (24.6%), and Comoros (24.52%).
What was the range of low birth weight rates in 2009?
In 2009, the range of low birth weight rates spanned from 3.75% in Iceland to 30.25% in India.
Insights by country
India
In 2009, India had the highest Low Birth Weight Rate globally at 30.25460284 %, ranking #1 out of 157 countries. This rate is significantly higher than the global average, indicating serious public health challenges. Key drivers include high rates of maternal malnutrition, limited access to healthcare, and socio-economic disparities that affect pregnant women's health. Additionally, India’s large population and diverse regional disparities exacerbate these issues, complicating efforts to improve maternal and infant health outcomes.
Netherlands
In 2009, the Netherlands had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 6.226674547 %, ranking #130 out of 157 countries. This rate is higher than many neighboring countries, indicating potential challenges in maternal and infant health. Contributing factors may include the country's diverse population and varying access to healthcare services, as well as socio-economic disparities that can impact prenatal care.
Zambia
Zambia had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 12.29642585 % in 2009, ranking #55 out of 157 countries. This rate is higher than the global average, indicating significant public health challenges. Contributing factors include inadequate maternal nutrition, high rates of infectious diseases, and limited access to quality prenatal care, which are prevalent in many regions of Zambia.
Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 10.94595426 % in 2009, ranking #71 out of 157 countries. This rate is higher than the global average, indicating potential health challenges for newborns in the region.
Factors contributing to this statistic include economic transitions affecting healthcare access and maternal nutrition, as well as demographic trends such as urbanization and changes in family planning practices. Addressing these issues is crucial for improving maternal and child health outcomes in Azerbaijan.
Bolivia
In 2009, Bolivia had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 8.45903729 %, ranking #97 out of 157 countries. This rate is higher than the global average, indicating potential health challenges for newborns in the country. Contributing factors include limited access to healthcare services, high levels of poverty, and nutritional deficiencies among pregnant women, which are prevalent in rural areas of Bolivia.
Morocco
In 2009, Morocco had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 16.68051288 %, ranking #22 out of 157 countries. This rate is higher than the global average, indicating potential health challenges for newborns in the country. Contributing factors include socioeconomic disparities, access to healthcare, and nutritional deficiencies among pregnant women, which are prevalent in certain regions of Morocco.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 5.130173006 % in 2009, ranking #147 out of 157 countries. This rate is notably higher than the global average, indicating potential public health challenges. Contributing factors include economic instability and healthcare access issues, which can impact maternal health and prenatal care quality.
Malawi
In 2009, Malawi had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 15.87034354 %, ranking #26 out of 157 countries. This rate is notably higher than the global average, indicating significant challenges in maternal and infant health. Contributing factors include high rates of malnutrition among pregnant women and limited access to quality prenatal care, exacerbated by economic constraints and health system weaknesses.
El Salvador
In 2009, El Salvador had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 10.44359146 %, ranking #82 out of 157 countries. This rate is higher than the global average, indicating significant health challenges compared to more developed nations. Contributing factors include limited access to prenatal care, high rates of poverty, and nutritional deficiencies among pregnant women, which impact maternal and infant health in the country.
Slovenia
In 2009, Slovenia had a Low Birth Weight Rate of 6.067310038 %, ranking #133 out of 157 countries. This rate is higher than the European average, indicating potential health concerns for newborns in the region. Contributing factors include Slovenia's relatively high rates of maternal smoking and economic pressures that may affect prenatal care access.
Data Source
Low-birthweight babies (% of births)
The World Bank provides global development data, including statistics on low-birthweight babies as a percentage of total births. This dataset offers insights into maternal and child health across various countries, highlighting public health challenges and trends.
Visit Data SourceHistorical Data by Year
Explore Low Birth Weight Rate data across different years. Compare trends and see how statistics have changed over time.