2. Significance
• Canada has seen an increase in low birth weight babies
in the last decade.
• Not only can this have negative implications for the
health care system and the families affected, but it can
have long-term implications for low birth weight babies
who have a higher risk of health and developmental
problems later on.
3. Core Indicator
• Low birth weight babies are usually the result of poor
nutrition, smoking, and drinking during pregnancy.
• The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI)
recorded a growing proportion of babies born with low
birth weight in Canada (see following chart) between
2001/2002 and 2009/2010.
4. Proportion of Babies Born with Low Birth
Weight in Canada, April 1 2001/March 31
2002 to April 1 2010/March 31 2011
6.3
6.2
6.1
6.0
5.9
5.8
5.7
5.6
2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010
Source: CIHI, Discharge Abstract and Hospital Morbidity databases
https://secure.cihi.ca/estore/productSeries.htm?pc=PCC226
.
5. Canada vs. OECD Countries
• Although the proportion of babies with low birth weight
has increased, Canada still has a relatively low
proportion when compared to other countries who are
part of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) (see following chart).
• Canada, tied with Denmark, had the fifth lowest low
birth weight rate among the twenty OECD countries, at
6.1%.
6. Proportion of Babies Born with Low
Birth Rate for OECD Countries, 2009
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Source: OECD Stats, OECD Health Data acquired from national statistics departments.
7. Canada’s Major CMAs
• In 2010/2011 the proportion of babies with low birth
weight in most of Canada’s major census metropolitan
areas (CMAs) tended to hover around the national
average (6.2%).
• The range was from 5.6 percent in Sudbury to 7.8 % in
Calgary, representing a gap of 2.2 percentage points (see
following chart).
• Toronto had the second highest rate at 7.3 %, followed
by Kingston at 6.8 %.
8. Proportion of Babies with Low Birth Weight
in Major CMAs, April 2010/March 31 2011
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Source: CIHI, Discharge Abstract and Hospital Morbidity databases.
9. CMA Trends (2000 to 2011)
• The proportion of babies with low birth weight has
increased in almost all major CMAs between 2001/2002
and 2009/2010 (see following chart).
• Sudbury was the only exception, with a decrease of 0.1
percentage point.
• The highest increase was in Kingston. The rate increased
1.4 % from 5.4% in 2001/2002 to 6.8% in 2010/2011.
10. Percentage Point Increase in Low Birth
Weight Rates in Major CMAs, April 1
2001/March 31 2002 to April 1
1.6
20`0/March 31 2011
1.2
0.8
0.4
0.0
-0.4
Source: CIHI, Discharge Abstract and Hospital Morbidity databases.
