Lithuania vs Mongolia: Prevalence of low birthweight (percent) — Value
Prevalence of low birthweight (percent) — Value over time
- Lithuania
- Mongolia
How they compare
Mongolia currently reports 4.9 % against 4.4 % in Lithuania, a difference of 0.5 %.
That makes Mongolia's figure about 1.1 times Lithuania's.
Across all 21 years both countries report, Mongolia has been ahead every year.
Lithuania ranks 139th and Mongolia ranks 137th of 146 countries.
Mongolia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Lithuania | Mongolia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 4.7 % | 6.89 % | 2.19 % | Mongolia |
| 2010s | 4.68 % | 5.47 % | 0.79 % | Mongolia |
| 2020s | 4.4 % | 4.9 % | 0.5 % | Mongolia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher prevalence of low birthweight (percent) — value, Lithuania or Mongolia?
- Mongolia, at 4.9 % against 4.4 % in Lithuania as of 2020.
- What is the difference in prevalence of low birthweight (percent) — value between Lithuania and Mongolia?
- 0.5 %, with Mongolia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Lithuania and Mongolia?
- 21 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2020.
- How do Lithuania and Mongolia rank globally for prevalence of low birthweight (percent) — value?
- Lithuania ranks 139th and Mongolia ranks 137th of 146 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Prevalence of low birthweight (percent) — Value. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Suite of Food Security Indicators presents the core set of food security indicators. Following the recommendation of experts gathered in the Committee on World Food Security (CFS) Round Table on hunger measurement, hosted at FAO headquarters in September 2011, an initial set of indicators aiming to capture various aspects of food insecurity is presented here. The choice of the indicators has been informed by expert judgement and the availability of data with sufficient coverage to enable comparisons across regions and over time. Many of these indicators are produced and published elsewhere by FAO and other international organizations. They are reported here in a single database with the aim of building a wide food security information system. More indicators will be added to this set as more data will become available. Indicators are classified along the four dimensions of food security -- availability, access, utilization and stability.