Bhutan vs Jordan: Prevalence of anemia among women of reproductive age (15-49 years)
Prevalence of anemia among women of reproductive age (15-49 years) over time
- Bhutan
- Jordan
How they compare
Bhutan currently reports 33.8 % against 33 % in Jordan, a difference of 0.8 %.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 24 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Bhutan ahead.
Bhutan ranks 47th and Jordan ranks 49th of 177 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Bhutan averaged higher in 2 and Jordan in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bhutan | Jordan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 28.41 % | 26.2 % | 2.21 % | Bhutan |
| 2010s | 29.21 % | 29.73 % | 0.52 % | Jordan |
| 2020s | 32.62 % | 32.42 % | 0.2 % | Bhutan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher prevalence of anemia among women of reproductive age (15-49 years), Bhutan or Jordan?
- Bhutan, at 33.8 % against 33 % in Jordan as of 2023.
- What is the difference in prevalence of anemia among women of reproductive age (15-49 years) between Bhutan and Jordan?
- 0.8 %, with Bhutan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bhutan and Jordan?
- 24 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2023.
- How do Bhutan and Jordan rank globally for prevalence of anemia among women of reproductive age (15-49 years)?
- Bhutan ranks 47th and Jordan ranks 49th of 177 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Prevalence of anemia among women of reproductive age (15-49 years) (percent) — Value — Female — All age ranges or no breakdown by age — National. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Suite of Gender Indicators presents a set of indicators relevant to agrifood systems that are disaggregated by sex, with the aim of highlighting gender differences across agrifood systems. The initial set of indicators is based on those used in FAO’s 2023 Status of Women in Agrifood Systems (SWAFS) report and on the recommendations of an expert consultation held in December 2023, and covers key dimensions including economic participation, governance, agency, social norms, assets and services, education, health, and nutrition. Indicator selection was informed by expert judgment and by the availability of data with sufficient geographic and temporal coverage to enable meaningful comparisons across regions and over time. While most indicators are produced and published by FAO and other international organizations, the objective of this domain is to provide a one-stop shop for sex-disaggregated data on agrifood systems.