Next Article in Journal
Trends in Diagnosing Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Pediatrics
Previous Article in Journal
Increased Risk of Parental Instability for Children Born Very Preterm and Impacts on Neurodevelopmental Outcomes at Age 12
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Children
Volume 9
Issue 3
10.3390/children9030305
children-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

Differences in Rates of Low Birth Weight among Prefectures in Japan: An Ecological Study Using Government Statistics Data

by
Tasuku Okui
* and
Naoki Nakashima
Medical Information Center, Kyushu University Hospital, Fukuoka 812-8582, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Children 2022, 9(3), 305; https://doi.org/10.3390/children9030305
Submission received: 5 January 2022 / Revised: 12 February 2022 / Accepted: 21 February 2022 / Published: 23 February 2022
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The differences in the rates and trends of the overall low birth weight and term low birth weight in recent years are unknown for the Japanese prefectures. In this ecological study, we revealed the rates for each prefecture and investigated the factors affecting the regional differences in these outcomes. Aggregated vital statistics data from 2007 to 2019 were obtained from the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare in Japan. The association between the outcomes and the variables, including the infants’ birth characteristics, medical characteristics, and socioeconomic characteristics of the prefectures, were analyzed. An analysis of repeated-measures data was conducted using the data from 2013 and 2018 for each prefecture. The trend for the rates of overall low birth weight and term low birth weight over the years differed among the prefectures. Moreover, the proportions of multiple births and lean (body mass index <18.5 kg/m2) and obese (body mass index ≥25.0 kg/m2) women had a statistically significant positive association with both the overall low birth weight rate and the term low birth weight rate among the prefectures. It was suggested that to resolve the difference in these outcomes among the prefectures, being obese or underweight needs to be addressed in mothers.

1. Introduction

The rates of low birth weight are representative of perinatal health outcomes worldwide and are one of the indicators of maternal and child health. Low birth weight is associated with preterm birth and intrauterine growth retardation. Low birth weight infants have a higher risk of neonatal and infant mortality or cardiovascular diseases [1,2,3,4]; thus, preventing these conditions is an important issue for public health and social security in Japan. There is a disparity in the outcome among countries, and the low birth rate in Japan is lower than the estimated worldwide prevalence [5,6]. On the other hand, the low birth rate showed an increase from the late 1970s to the 2010s [7], and changes in body mass index (BMI), maternal aging, and an increase in cesarean sections are believed to be contributing factors. Although some studies have investigated an association between maternal characteristics and birth weight trends in Japan [7,8,9], few studies have investigated an association between the outcome and multiple types of factors, such as sociodemographic or physical characteristics, using nationwide statistics data in Japan.
Regional differences in the rates of preterm birth or low birth weight within a country have been investigated in other countries, and a disparity in the outcomes has been observed [10,11,12,13]. There are regional differences in the rates of infants with low birth weight among prefectures in Japan [14,15,16]; however, no studies have investigated the regional differences in the term low birth weight among Japanese prefectures. The term low birth weight is defined as low birth weight excluding preterm birth [5,17,18,19], and is used as an indicator of fetal growth restriction. In Japan, a decreasing trend in the rate of the term low birth weight was observed in recent years [5], although there might exist some differences in the trends among regions. In addition, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have been conducted assessing the differences in low birth weight rates among the Japanese prefectures in recent years. Moreover, identifying factors affecting the regional differences is important in understanding the reasons for these differences. Low birth weight is known to be affected by the socioeconomic or demographic characteristics of regions in other countries [10,12], and there is a possibility that regional differences in these characteristics also affect the outcome also in Japan.
In this study, we assessed the rate of low birth weight in prefectures in Japan and investigated the factors affecting these differences by an ecological study using all of the birth data in the vital statistics.

2. Materials and Methods

Vital statistics data for births were used for the analysis. We requested the aggregated data from the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare by a made-to-order aggregation based on the Statistics Act (Heisei 19 nen, Article 53). Data on the number of births by maternal age group, year, prefecture, birth weight, and gestational age were obtained. Data from 2007 to 2019 on all 47 prefectures in Japan were obtained. In this study, we used the operational definitions for the two outcomes, i.e., low birth weight rate and the term low birth weight. Low birth weight was defined as infants whose birth weight was less than 2500 g [7,9]. Term birth was defined as births at 37 weeks of gestation or later, and infants with term low birth weight were defined as those whose birth weight was less than 2500 g among the term births, similar to previous studies [17,18]. The cases with missing data regarding gestational age, birth weight, or maternal age were excluded from the analysis.
To investigate an association between the outcomes and predictors via an ecological study using prefectural data, we used variables related to the medical characteristics, birth characteristics, maternal characteristics, and socioeconomic factors of the prefectures: the proportion of multiple births (%); the proportion of live births from mothers aged under 20 years (%); the proportion of live births from mothers aged 40 years or more (%); the number of hospitals per 100,000 persons; the number of clinics per 100,000 persons; the number of hospitals with an obstetrics department per 100,000 persons; total population; population density; taxable income per capita (1000 yen); the proportion of female high school graduates going to a higher educational institution; the proportion of live births from unemployed households; the proportion of lean women (%); and the proportion of obese women (%) for each prefecture. Data on the number of multiple births and total births for each prefecture were obtained from the vital statistics [20]. We included hospitals with an obstetrics department or an obstetrics and gynecology department as hospitals with an obstetrics department, and the data on the number of hospitals and clinics were obtained from the Survey of Medical Institutions [21]. Taxable income for each prefecture was assessed in “the Survey on Taxation Status of Municipal Tax” by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications [21], and area data of each prefecture were available from the Municipalities Area Statistics of Japan [21]. Data on the proportion of female high school graduates going to a higher educational institution were obtained from the School Basic Survey in Japan [21], and data on the proportion of live births from unemployed households were obtained from the vital statistics [20]. The numbers of lean and obese women for each prefecture were obtained from the National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups of Japan open data [22]. The Specific Health Checkups are conducted for insured persons and their dependents aged 40–74 years in all of Japan, and they are encouraged to receive a medical checkup concerning lifestyle-related diseases every year. Therefore, we used the Specific Health Checkups data only for women aged 40–49 years who are in the reproductive age groups. In contrast, we used all the birth data, regardless of the mother’s age, in the analysis. Data on the BMI classification for the recipients of the checkups in each prefecture are available, and the proportion of lean persons (BMI < 18.5 kg/m2) and of obese persons (BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m2) was calculated. Although obesity is often judged based on the cut-off value of BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m2 across the world [23,24], the cut-off value of BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m2 is generally used in Japan and Korea [25,26,27,28,29]. Data on these explanatory variables in 2013–2018 were used for the analysis because all the data were publicly available only in these years.
For the statistical analysis, we calculated the overall low birth weight rate and term low birth weight rate for each prefecture by year. In addition, we calculated the overall low birth weight rate and term low birth weight rate in the analyzed periods for each prefecture and calculated the annual percent change (APC) of the outcomes for each prefecture. The APC was calculated by applying a linear regression model to the logarithm of the rate using year as an explanatory variable. Moreover, an ecological study was conducted to investigate an association between the outcomes and the characteristics of the prefecture. An ecological study is a type of epidemiological study that is conducted to investigate an association between a health outcome and risk factors using regional-level data as opposed to individual-level data, and it aims at identifying the risk factors of the health outcome by focusing on the differences in the regional characteristics. Therefore, regression analysis was performed using the data of each prefecture in this study. An analysis using the repeated-measures data of the prefectures was conducted using the data from 2013 and 2018 in each prefecture. A linear mixed effects model was used using the logarithm of the rate as an outcome, and each prefecture was treated as a random effect in the analysis. When regression analysis is used for data where multiple observations exist for a subject (often called panel data or repeated-measures data), a linear mixed model is often used. All the explanatory variables were scaled, and a standardized partial regression coefficient (SPRC) and its 95% confidence interval were calculated for each variable to compare their effects on the outcomes. The SPRC is a type of regression coefficient that is obtained when an explanatory variable is scaled before applying the regression model. By calculating the SPRC, we could compare the degree of association of an outcome variable among the explanatory variables. A statistically significant difference was set as <0.05, and all the statistical tests were 2-sided. All the statistical analyses were conducted using R version 3.6.3 (https://cran.r-project.org/bin/windows/base/old/3.6.3/, accessed on 23 February 2022).

3. Results

Table 1 shows the yearly number of births, low-birth-weight infants, number of term births, and term low-birth-weight infants in Japan. The number of births continuously decreased in these periods. In addition, the overall low birth weight rate and term low birth weight rate decreased from 2007 to 2019.
Table 2 shows the annual rate of low birth weight per 1000 births for each prefecture. The trend of the low birth weight rate in these periods differed depending on the prefecture. The rate for Okinawa was the highest among the prefectures in many of the years. In addition, the rates in Tochigi and Kagoshima were always above 100 in the analyzed periods.
Table 3 shows the annual rate of term low birth weight per 1000 births for each prefecture. The trend of the term low birth weight rate also differed depending on the prefecture. The values for prefectures such as Yamanashi, Kochi, and Okinawa tended to be large, whereas those for prefectures such as Ishikawa and Fukui tended to be small.
Table 4 shows the overall low birth weight rate and the term low birth weight rate per 1000 births in 2007–2019 for each prefecture and their APCs. The signs of APC of the overall low birth weight rate and the term low birth weight rate differed across prefectures.
Table 5 shows the median (Q1–Q3) for each characteristic in the prefectures used in the analysis. For the regression analysis, 282 (47 prefectures × 6 years) observations were used.
Table 6 shows results of the regression analysis. The proportion of live births from mothers aged 40 years or more had a statistically significant positive association with the rate of low birth weight at term. Hence, the higher the proportion of live births from mothers aged 40 or more years in a prefecture is, the higher the rate of term low birth weight of the prefecture tends to become. In addition, the proportion of multiple births and the proportions of lean (body mass index (BMI) < 18.5 kg/m2) and obese women (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2) had a statistically significant positive association with both the overall low birth weight rate and the term low birth weight rate. Therefore, the proportions of lean and obese women in a prefecture were positively associated with the prefectural low birth weight rate. In addition, the absolute value of SPRC for the proportion of obese women was the largest among the explanatory variables, and the proportion of obese women was suggested to be the largest factor related to the regional differences in low birth weight.

4. Discussion

In this ecological study, we aimed to reveal the low birth weight rates in different prefectures in Japan and identify the factors that determine the differences in these rates. As a result, we revealed a trend in the low birth weight rate for each prefecture in Japan and identified some factors associated with these regional differences. The proportion of multiple births were statistically significantly associated with low birth weight and term low birth weight, and the proportion of births by women with advanced age was statistically significantly associated with the term low birth weight rate. Multiple births are a well-known factor contributing to preterm birth and low birth weight [30]. In addition, older maternal age is known to be a risk factor for intrauterine growth restriction [31,32].
As shown in the results, the number of births in Japan is rapidly decreasing over the years. Tendencies to not marry and marry late are directly related to the decline in fertility in Japan, and factors such as the increased burden of parenting, women’s empowerment, and an increase in the rate of irregular employment are believed to be the possible causes [33]. In addition, the overall low birth weight rate and the term low birth weight rate showed a decreasing trend in Japan, and regression analysis indicated that the year was negatively associated with these outcomes. Although the reason for the phenomenon remains to be uncovered, an increase in the rate of participation in prenatal care is one possible reason. From 2009, public subsidies for prenatal care largely increased in Japan, and it was shown in a prefecture in Japan that this policy increased the number of prenatal care visits and decreased the overall low birth weight rate [34]. An association between low birth weight and prenatal care visits has been previously reported [35,36], and an increase in the rate of participation in prenatal care is a possible reason for the decrease in the low birth weight rate.
Pre-pregnancy obesity and underweight are both risk factors for low birth weight in infants [37,38]. In particular, an increase in the rate of underweight women is believed to be a main reason for the increase in the rate of low-birth-weight infants in recent years in Japan [9,39]. Poor nutritional intake and underweight in pregnant women led to poor maternal weight gain and affected optimal fetal growth [39]. On the other hand, the prevalence of obesity was more strongly associated with low birth weight in this study. Pre-pregnancy obesity is related to diabetes and hypertension, which are risk factors for low birth weight [40]. In addition, obese women have a higher risk of pregnancy complications, such as gestational hypertension and diabetes [41,42], and women with these pregnancy complications are at higher risk of preterm births and low-birth-weight infants [40,43]. There is also a possibility that rates of low birth weight in the past affected the obesity or underweight prevalence in the present. An association between underweight and low birth weight at birth has been shown among children in Japan [44], and lower birth weight was shown to be associated with underweight among children also in China [45]. In addition, one study found that low birth weight was associated with obesity in adults [46], while a meta-analysis showed that low-birth-weight infants have a decreased risk of later overweight [47]. A previous study investigating regional differences in low birth weight in Japan for 1975 and 1994 showed that the rates of low birth weight in Okinawa were also high among the prefectures in these periods [15], and it is possible that low birth weight affected physical characteristics in later years.
It has been suggested that regional differences in obesity and underweight possibly affect the regional differences in low birth weight among prefectures. Preventive measures for obesity are often promoted to prevent lifestyle-related diseases; however, obesity is also related to the birth weight of infants. Current differences in health statuses among prefectures can lead to differences in health statuses in subsequent generations. It has been suggested that lower maternal birth weight is associated with low-birth-weight infants in Japan [48]. Therefore, health guidance not only for middle-aged or older women with obesity but also for younger women with obesity might also be needed.
Disparities are known to exist in the rates of both infant and adult mortality among prefectures in Japan [49,50], and understanding and correcting the differences in perinatal outcomes among regions might contribute to improving these disparities in the future. There are some limitations in this study. First, this is an ecological study, and an ecological fallacy in the results is possible. Second, we could use only the data of 2013 and 2018 for the ecological analysis, and a further study using data from longer periods will be meaningful. Third, the BMI data from each prefecture were available for people aged 40–49 years because these age groups were participants in the Specific Health Checkups; we could not obtain the BMI data for those aged 15–39 years for each prefecture. In addition, participation in the Specific Health Checkups is not compulsory, and there is a possibility that people not participating in the checkups affected the differences among the prefectures. Fourth, other socioeconomic or environmental factors might also be related to the regional differences in the outcomes. For example, the percentage of pregnant women not participating in prenatal care is also considered to be related to the regional differences, and their data are not available. In addition, complications during pregnancy, such as gestational hypertension or diabetes, are considered to be associated with low birth weight; however, data on these characteristics were not publicly available. Moreover, we used made-to-order aggregation data from the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare in Japan, and the variables that can be requested in one aggregation table were limited. We could not request other factors related to the outcomes, such as parity and household occupations at birth in the aggregation table.

5. Conclusions

We revealed regional differences in the rates of low birth weight and term low birth weight, and identified characteristics of prefectures associated with the regional differences by an ecological study using all of the birth data in Japan. As a result, we can see that trends in the rates differed depending on the prefectures in the analyzed periods. As a result of this ecological study, the proportion of live births from mothers aged 40 years or more had a statistically significant positive association with the rate of term low birth weight. In addition, the proportion of multiple births and the proportions of lean and obese women had a statistically significant positive association with both the low birth weight rate and term low birth weight rate.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.O.; methodology, T.O.; formal analysis, T.O.; investigation, T.O.; data curation, T.O.; writing—original draft preparation, T.O.; writing—review and editing, N.N.; visualization, T.O.; supervision, N.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

We used aggregated data of the vital statistics not including individual information in this study. We asked the Bioethics Section of Kyushu University Hospital whether an ethical approval was needed for the use of the aggregated data, and the Bioethics Section responded that an approval by the ethical committee was not needed for using the data.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The low birth weight data used in this study were obtained from the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare in Japan. The results shown in this study were processed and analyzed by the authors, and are different from the statistics published by the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare. In addition, the data on characteristics of the prefectures can be obtained from the websites of government statistics in Japan.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sugai, M.K.; Gilmour, S.; Ota, E.; Shibuya, K. Trends in perinatal mortality and its risk factors in Japan: Analysis of vital registration data, 1979–2010. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 46681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Vilanova, C.S.; Hirakata, V.N.; de Souza Buriol, V.C.; Nunes, M.; Goldani, M.Z.; da Silva, C.H. The relationship between the different low birth weight strata of newborns with infant mortality and the influence of the main health determinants in the extreme south of Brazil. Popul. Health Metr. 2019, 17, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Zhao, M.; Shu, X.O.; Jin, F.; Yang, G.; Li, H.L.; Liu, D.K.; Wen, W.; Gao, Y.T.; Zheng, W. Birthweight, childhood growth and hypertension in adulthood. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2002, 31, 1043–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Miura, K.; Nakagawa, H.; Tabata, M.; Morikawa, Y.; Nishijo, M.; Kagamimori, S. Birth weight, childhood growth, and cardiovascular disease risk factors in Japanese aged 20 years. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2001, 153, 783–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Mine, T.; Tsuboi, S.; Fukushima, F. Twenty-year trends of low birth weight in japan: A joinpoint regression analysis of data from 2000 to 2019. Front. Reprod. Health 2021, 3, 772575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Blencowe, H.; Krasevec, J.; de Onis, M.; Black, R.E.; An, X.; Stevens, G.A.; Borghi, E.; Hayashi, C.; Estevez, D.; Cegolon, L.; et al. National, regional, and worldwide estimates of low birthweight in 2015, with trends from 2000: A systematic analysis. Lancet Glob. Health. 2019, 7, e849–e860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Takemoto, Y.; Ota, E.; Yoneoka, D.; Mori, R.; Takeda, S. Japanese secular trends in birthweight and the prevalence of low birthweight infants during the last three decades: A population-based study. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 31396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yoshida, H.; Kato, N.; Yokoyama, T. Current trends in low birth weight infants in Japan. J. Natl. Inst. Public Health 2014, 63, 2–16. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kato, N.; Sauvaget, C.; Yoshida, H.; Yokoyama, T.; Yoshiike, N. Factors associated with birthweight decline in Japan (1980–2004). BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021, 21, 337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fuster, V.; Zuluaga, P.; Colantonio, S.E.; Román-Busto, J. Regional differences in low birth weight in Spain: Biological, demographic and socioeconomic variables. J. Biosoc. Sci. 2015, 47, 90–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Byrnes, J.; Mahoney, R.; Quaintance, C.; Gould, J.B.; Carmichael, S.; Shaw, G.M.; Showen, A.; Phibbs, C.; Stevenson, D.K.; Wise, P.H. Spatial and temporal patterns in preterm birth in the United States. Pediatr. Res. 2015, 77, 836–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Insaf, T.Z.; Talbot, T. Identifying areas at risk of low birth weight using spatial epidemiology: A small area surveillance study. Prev. Med. 2016, 88, 108–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Murray, S.R.; Juodakis, J.; Bacelis, J.; Sand, A.; Norman, J.E.; Sengpiel, V.; Jacobsson, B. Geographical differences in preterm delivery rates in Sweden: A population-based cohort study. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2019, 98, 106–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Omi, H.; Hirooka, K.; Mochizuki, Y.; Hata, A. An association among annual trends of sex ratio at birth, sex ratio for fetal death by spontaneous abortion, and sex ratio for low birth weight infants by prefecture and region. J. Health Welf. Stat. 2009, 56, 13–18. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
  15. Serizawa, K.; Ogihara, A. A study of regional differences in low birth weight rate. J. Health Welf. Stat. 2015, 62, 19–24. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
  16. Baba, S.; Nomura, M.; Marui, E. An analysis on an increase in low birth weight infant in Japan in the last 10 years. J. Health Welf. Stat. 2008, 55, 11–16. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
  17. von Ehrenstein, O.S.; Wilhelm, M.; Ritz, B. Maternal occupation and term low birth weight in a predominantly latina population in los angeles, california. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2013, 55, 1046–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Coker, E.; Liverani, S.; Ghosh, J.K.; Jerrett, M.; Beckerman, B.; Li, A.; Ritz, B.; Molitor, J. Multi-pollutant exposure profiles associated with term low birth weight in Los Angeles County. Environ. Int. 2016, 91, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Falcão, I.R.; Ribeiro-Silva, R.C.; de Almeida, M.F.; Fiaccone, R.L.; Rocha, A.d.S.; Ortelan, N.; Silva, N.J.; Paixao, E.S.; Ichihara, M.Y.; Rodrigues, L.C.; et al. Factors associated with low birth weight at term: A population-based linkage study of the 100 million Brazilian cohort. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2020, 20, 536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan. The Vital Statistics. Available online: https://www.e-stat.go.jp/stat-search/files?page=1&toukei=00450011&tstat=000001028897 (accessed on 5 January 2022).
  21. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. State of Prefectures and Municipalities (System of Social and Demographic Statistics). Available online: https://www.e-stat.go.jp/regional-statistics/ssdsview (accessed on 5 January 2022).
  22. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan. NDB Open Data. Available online: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/seisakunitsuite/bunya/0000177182.html (accessed on 5 January 2022).
  23. Pasco, J.A.; Holloway, K.L.; Dobbins, A.G.; Kotowicz, M.A.; Williams, L.J.; Brennan, S.L. Body mass index and measures of body fat for defining obesity and underweight: A cross-sectional, population-based study. BMC Obes. 2014, 1, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Romero-Corral, A.; Somers, V.K.; Sierra-Johnson, J.; Thomas, R.J.; Collazo-Clavell, M.L.; Korinek, J.; Allison, T.G.; Batsis, J.A.; Sert-Kuniyoshi, F.H.; Lopez-Jimenez, F. Accuracy of body mass index in diagnosing obesity in the adult general population. Int. J. Obes. 2008, 32, 959–966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Kanazawa, M.; Yoshiike, N.; Osaka, T.; Numba, Y.; Zimmet, P.; Inoue, S. Criteria and classification of obesity in Japan and Asia-Oceania. World Rev. Nutr. Diet. 2005, 94, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  26. Nam, G.E.; Park, H.S. Perspective on diagnostic criteria for obesity and abdominal obesity in korean adults. J. Obes. Metab. Syndr. 2018, 27, 134–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Asahara, S.I.; Miura, H.; Ogawa, W.; Tamori, Y. Sex difference in the association of obesity with personal or social background among urban residents in Japan. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0242105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Yoon, Y.S.; Oh, S.W. Recent shift of body mass index distribution in Korea: A population-based korea national health insurance database, 2002–2013. J. Korean Med. Sci. 2017, 32, 434–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  29. Examination Committee of Criteria for ‘Obesity Disease’ in Japan; Japan Society for the Study of Obesity. New criteria for ‘obesity disease’ in Japan. Circ. J. 2002, 66, 987–992.
  30. Blondel, B.; Kogan, M.D.; Alexander, G.R.; Dattani, N.; Kramer, M.S.; Macfarlane, A.; Wen, S.W. The impact of the increasing number of multiple births on the rates of preterm birth and low birthweight: An international study. Am. J. Public Health 2002, 92, 1323–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Odibo, A.O.; Nelson, D.; Stamilio, D.M.; Sehdev, H.M.; Macones, G.A. Advanced maternal age is an independent risk factor for intrauterine growth restriction. Am. J. Perinatol. 2006, 23, 325–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jacobsson, B.; Ladfors, L.; Milsom, I. Advanced maternal age and adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet. Gynecol. 2004, 104, 727–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Atoh, M. Thinking about very low fertility rate in Japan, based upon its demographic analysis. J. Health Care Soc. 2017, 27, 5–20. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Matsushima, M.; Kohara, M. The effect of public support on the utilization of prenatal care and the weight of newborn babies. J. Soc. Secur. Res. 2019, 3, 546–561. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
  35. Pinzón-Rondón, Á.M.; Gutiérrez-Pinzon, V.; Madriñan-Navia, H.; Amin, J.; Aguilera-Otalvaro, P.; Hoyos-Martínez, A. Low birth weight and prenatal care in Colombia: A cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2015, 15, 118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Vale, C.C.R.; Almeida, N.K.O.; Almeida, R.M.V.R. Association between prenatal care adequacy indexes and low birth weight outcome. Rev. Bras. Ginecol. Obstet. 2021, 43, 256–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. McDonald, S.D.; Han, Z.; Mulla, S.; Beyene, J.; Knowledge Synthesis Group. Overweight and obesity in mothers and risk of preterm birth and low birth weight infants: Systematic review and meta-analyses. BMJ 2010, 341, c3428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Han, Z.; Mulla, S.; Beyene, J.; Liao, G.; McDonald, S.D.; Knowledge Synthesis Group. Maternal underweight and the risk of preterm birth and low birth weight: A systematic review and meta-analyses. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2011, 40, 65–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Takimoto, H.; Yokoyama, T.; Yoshiike, N.; Fukuoka, H. Increase in low-birth-weight infants in Japan and associated risk factors, 1980–2000. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2005, 31, 314–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Valero De Bernabé, J.; Soriano, T.; Albaladejo, R.; Juarranz, M.; Calle, M.E.; Martínez, D.; Domínguez-Rojas, V. Risk factors for low birth weight: A review. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2004, 116, 3–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ramachenderan, J.; Bradford, J.; McLean, M. Maternal obesity and pregnancy complications: A review. Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2008, 48, 228–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Grieger, J.A.; Hutchesson, M.J.; Cooray, S.D.; Bahri Khomami, M.; Zaman, S.; Segan, L.; Teede, H.; Moran, L.J. A review of maternal overweight and obesity and its impact on cardiometabolic outcomes during pregnancy and postpartum. Ther. Adv. Reprod. Health 2021, 15, 2633494120986544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Scime, N.V.; Chaput, K.H.; Faris, P.D.; Quan, H.; Tough, S.C.; Metcalfe, A. Pregnancy complications and risk of preterm birth according to maternal age: A population-based study of delivery hospitalizations in Alberta. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2020, 99, 459–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kato, N.; Kubota, M.; Saito, H.; Takahashi, Y. Underweight and obesity in low birth weight children in early infancy in Japan. Food Nutr. Sci. 2015, 6, 339–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Ye, R.; Pei, L.; Ren, A.; Zhang, Y.; Zheng, X.; Liu, J.M. Birth weight, maternal body mass index, and early childhood growth: A prospective birth cohort study in China. J. Epidemiol. 2010, 20, 421–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Jornayvaz, F.R.; Vollenweider, P.; Bochud, M.; Mooser, V.; Waeber, G.; Marques-Vidal, P. Low birth weight leads to obesity, diabetes and increased leptin levels in adults: The CoLaus study. Cardiovasc. Diabetol. 2016, 15, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  47. Schellong, K.; Schulz, S.; Harder, T.; Plagemann, A. Birth weight and long-term overweight risk: Systematic review and a meta-analysis including 643,902 persons from 66 studies and 26 countries globally. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e47776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Shibata, M.; Ogawa, K.; Kanazawa, S.; Kawasaki, M.; Morisaki, N.; Mito, A.; Sago, H.; Horikawa, R.; Arata, N. Association of maternal birth weight with the risk of low birth weight and small-for-gestational-age in offspring: A prospective single-center cohort study. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0251734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Nomura, S.; Sakamoto, H.; Glenn, S.; Tsugawa, Y.; Abe, S.K.; Rahman, M.M.; Brown, J.C.; Ezoe, S.; Fitzmaurice, C.; Inokuchi, T.; et al. Population health and regional variations of disease burden in Japan, 1990–2015: A systematic subnational analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 2017, 390, 1521–1538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Nagata, C.; Moriichi, A.; Morisaki, N.; Gai-Tobe, R.; Ishiguro, A.; Mori, R. Inter-prefecture disparity in under-5 mortality: 115 year trend in Japan. Pediatr. Int. 2017, 59, 816–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Yearly number of births, low-birth-weight infants, number of term births, and term low-birth-weight infants in Japan.
Table 1. Yearly number of births, low-birth-weight infants, number of term births, and term low-birth-weight infants in Japan.
YearNumber of BirthsNumber of Low-Birth-Weight Infants (%)Number of Term BirthsNumber of Term Low-Birth-Weight Infants (%)
20071,089,196105,090 (9.65)1,026,11661,910 (6.03)
20081,090,498104,402 (9.57)1,027,71561,785 (6.01)
20091,069,486102,610 (9.59)1,008,52260,970 (6.05)
20101,070,786102,999 (9.62)1,009,49861,377 (6.08)
20111,050,300100,328 (9.55)990,04659,383 (6.00)
20121,036,80099,270 (9.57)977,30859,122 (6.05)
20131,029,45998,579 (9.58)970,24558,477 (6.03)
20141,003,24795,741 (9.54)946,36656,994 (6.02)
20151,005,36795,174 (9.47)949,26557,155 (6.02)
2016976,88192,076 (9.43)922,33555,172 (5.98)
2017945,84089,328 (9.44)892,31553,177 (5.96)
2018918,11386,239 (9.39)866,40750,919 (5.88)
2019864,97881,435 (9.41)816,45748,403 (5.93)
Table
Table 2. Annual rate of overall low birth weight per 1000 births for each prefecture.
Table 2. Annual rate of overall low birth weight per 1000 births for each prefecture.
Year
Prefecture2007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019
Hokkaido98.4 95.5 91.4 97.8 96.7 97.3 97.5 97.1 93.3 92.0 95.0 91.5 91.5
Aomori96.1 94.5 92.2 95.0 94.4 95.0 93.4 86.9 87.4 84.5 88.5 99.2 95.3
Iwate90.6 91.2 90.4 93.9 90.6 93.0 96.7 97.3 91.9 97.8 97.3 101.1 99.2
Miyagi90.9 91.9 90.8 91.8 95.4 95.5 98.4 95.2 93.0 97.1 97.7 92.7 92.9
Akita96.8 103.9 96.3 98.3 99.2 95.1 100.0 101.9 97.1 105.2 101.2 104.4 101.8
Yamagata86.1 88.5 82.9 90.1 81.8 87.6 88.9 89.7 91.2 93.4 88.5 90.1 88.4
Fukushima96.8 91.0 89.4 95.8 91.1 96.4 99.5 96.5 94.9 94.6 90.1 90.1 95.3
Ibaraki96.7 95.5 90.3 95.8 94.5 97.5 97.1 94.9 96.9 93.7 93.1 94.5 95.2
Tochigi100.5 101.3 104.9 103.1 105.3 104.8 109.5 102.9 105.2 104.2 105.1 105.7 101.5
Gunma98.4 94.1 93.0 93.8 92.9 97.8 96.1 95.1 95.4 90.4 95.5 98.4 95.3
Saitama94.7 94.5 94.2 95.3 93.9 95.2 96.4 94.3 94.6 91.6 94.1 94.0 95.0
Chiba91.7 90.2 92.1 92.4 92.3 92.6 93.4 90.8 88.4 92.4 88.8 90.1 90.9
Tokyo94.3 95.6 94.6 93.8 94.9 93.4 94.1 91.9 91.1 91.9 90.9 91.4 92.2
Kanagawa96.3 97.3 96.1 96.2 95.5 97.1 93.5 95.4 94.5 94.8 95.7 93.2 94.6
Niigata89.8 86.0 89.3 88.3 90.0 92.8 92.7 95.0 95.5 90.1 95.7 88.9 89.2
Toyama97.3 85.1 101.2 88.8 86.9 88.9 81.5 86.2 88.5 97.4 88.2 88.4 87.1
Ishikawa87.5 82.1 78.5 87.7 89.0 86.2 91.9 90.5 94.9 86.5 90.8 85.9 91.5
Fukui88.6 93.2 85.5 84.7 82.3 88.2 86.2 81.8 87.0 87.2 82.1 86.7 89.0
Yamanashi99.6 106.7 116.2 112.1 97.9 105.9 101.5 101.6 102.7 102.3 97.6 102.8 104.8
Nagano95.8 94.9 101.0 96.9 99.9 92.7 95.0 95.0 93.8 95.6 92.8 90.6 95.8
Gifu91.1 92.3 93.6 92.9 96.5 95.5 93.5 87.4 90.7 91.0 93.6 91.0 98.3
Shizuoka103.5 101.9 103.2 101.6 101.2 101.6 102.2 99.9 100.6 101.2 98.2 98.9 97.1
Aichi98.0 95.9 99.8 97.6 95.9 97.7 96.5 97.8 98.1 97.5 94.7 97.3 97.5
Mie92.2 86.8 92.2 91.8 89.7 88.7 88.9 96.9 93.1 91.7 92.6 90.1 92.6
Shiga94.0 93.8 92.6 94.2 98.7 96.4 93.5 98.3 92.6 91.6 94.4 92.2 90.1
Kyoto99.0 99.0 98.3 100.6 97.8 98.2 97.1 96.5 94.6 96.2 95.1 94.2 94.1
Osaka97.4 97.1 96.8 97.2 97.4 94.8 93.7 96.0 92.8 90.4 92.9 90.0 90.6
Hyogo100.3 96.5 96.0 95.5 95.9 94.6 96.8 95.9 92.4 95.8 93.9 93.7 92.4
Nara98.4 98.4 92.9 91.1 91.7 90.5 96.2 90.0 91.8 94.5 86.2 93.1 87.8
Wakayama95.0 99.1 94.2 92.2 99.2 89.0 91.2 98.2 96.4 96.1 94.6 88.6 93.7
Tottori88.0 89.8 89.0 98.8 99.2 93.6 99.0 102.3 96.3 100.1 104.2 100.5 100.8
Shimane88.8 94.5 111.6 106.7 107.9 104.6 97.1 108.1 104.0 100.6 96.1 99.9 105.2
Okayama89.1 85.8 93.9 87.7 87.9 90.9 90.2 92.7 91.6 86.5 91.2 90.2 79.2
Hiroshima95.2 93.5 97.6 96.2 99.9 96.3 96.3 95.6 96.6 97.1 95.4 97.7 93.5
Yamaguchi96.0 102.4 99.1 98.6 97.2 98.1 94.0 93.4 98.8 93.8 94.2 92.6 99.7
Tokushima84.1 87.4 95.0 96.1 89.0 83.7 97.6 86.2 89.7 101.4 97.5 84.5 89.8
Kagawa89.0 90.9 92.2 94.0 84.6 92.8 83.4 89.2 91.1 91.0 85.7 90.3 92.1
Ehime91.9 90.6 92.0 90.9 93.8 86.4 89.6 88.0 94.0 86.5 92.0 94.5 86.8
Kochi112.5 113.3 101.0 104.7 105.0 112.1 107.0 106.7 102.4 89.8 102.6 102.5 111.7
Fukuoka104.2 101.7 100.1 102.0 98.3 98.6 99.5 97.4 99.1 96.4 97.5 97.2 94.6
Saga96.0 96.4 89.8 98.1 91.0 90.9 97.2 94.3 91.3 93.7 97.3 89.1 92.6
Nagasaki92.8 97.0 91.5 99.5 86.2 88.5 88.9 90.5 91.3 89.6 91.2 93.0 92.2
Kumamoto100.4 98.9 97.6 92.9 91.8 96.6 89.3 94.6 94.9 87.3 93.4 89.6 91.0
Oita92.8 89.4 94.0 95.1 88.5 91.1 92.8 86.0 94.6 96.5 95.2 95.9 100.6
Miyazaki104.2 107.5 105.6 100.1 104.8 101.1 103.5 105.8 103.4 98.9 101.0 102.1 100.5
Kagoshima100.4 104.3 106.4 104.2 105.3 101.8 104.3 111.5 104.5 103.1 114.9 107.0 107.9
Okinawa117.9 109.5 115.3 111.9 106.3 115.9 113.8 114.5 109.1 112.7 110.8 109.9 111.5
Table
Table 3. Annual rate of term low birth weight per 1000 births for each prefecture.
Table 3. Annual rate of term low birth weight per 1000 births for each prefecture.
Year
Prefecture2007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019
Hokkaido60.1 58.2 55.8 60.7 57.0 58.5 58.1 58.6 57.0 55.6 56.4 56.4 56.4
Aomori55.5 55.8 53.2 57.8 57.1 59.7 56.0 53.9 57.7 56.0 56.6 59.5 58.8
Iwate54.8 53.9 53.2 58.3 57.2 59.0 61.7 57.8 55.4 58.3 59.3 60.5 57.0
Miyagi53.6 54.9 53.6 54.0 57.0 56.3 57.0 55.5 54.8 59.7 57.3 55.5 54.0
Akita56.7 63.6 58.1 57.8 59.6 58.3 56.7 62.8 63.3 69.0 67.0 64.6 64.2
Yamagata52.3 55.3 50.1 54.2 51.9 54.9 52.6 57.2 58.0 61.0 56.4 50.5 54.9
Fukushima58.5 57.6 54.5 63.6 59.3 61.9 64.4 61.6 61.5 60.4 59.9 57.0 61.3
Ibaraki59.7 61.0 58.2 61.2 59.9 62.8 61.6 59.9 63.4 60.8 60.8 61.2 61.2
Tochigi62.7 62.0 63.7 66.2 63.8 66.8 65.9 61.3 68.3 66.9 65.9 68.9 66.1
Gunma64.5 59.9 60.5 59.9 60.1 63.4 60.9 60.0 61.2 56.7 62.2 62.7 60.1
Saitama58.8 59.8 60.8 60.7 59.2 59.8 59.9 59.2 60.2 57.7 59.6 58.3 58.9
Chiba57.7 57.6 57.0 58.9 57.4 57.6 59.8 57.9 55.1 58.2 56.7 57.0 57.4
Tokyo60.4 60.5 60.0 60.7 59.9 59.4 60.9 58.5 58.5 59.2 58.1 58.1 59.0
Kanagawa62.7 63.8 62.0 61.7 61.1 62.7 61.0 61.7 62.6 60.8 60.9 57.5 59.2
Niigata56.6 53.0 54.7 53.9 54.0 58.2 52.5 58.4 58.7 56.8 60.6 53.7 56.2
Toyama58.6 47.2 61.0 55.4 56.6 55.1 49.1 56.0 58.7 58.8 56.1 57.3 56.2
Ishikawa54.0 49.1 47.1 54.3 55.8 53.9 57.5 58.6 58.3 53.6 55.9 51.4 56.1
Fukui49.1 54.8 51.6 50.6 48.1 55.2 55.6 51.0 55.3 54.7 55.3 55.8 58.9
Yamanashi62.5 71.3 77.2 75.8 64.6 70.8 67.3 59.7 66.7 68.4 62.0 66.3 70.0
Nagano61.3 60.1 64.2 63.3 65.8 61.2 63.1 64.7 63.5 65.1 63.1 60.1 66.1
Gifu57.8 56.0 57.3 58.6 59.9 60.4 57.2 53.0 58.3 55.2 57.1 55.1 62.1
Shizuoka67.3 64.1 68.5 63.5 66.6 65.7 64.9 64.8 65.4 65.4 62.2 62.8 61.3
Aichi62.0 62.7 63.9 62.0 61.2 61.9 61.3 61.8 62.0 62.1 58.9 61.6 60.0
Mie58.8 51.9 56.1 55.0 54.6 54.7 54.8 60.9 54.5 53.7 55.1 51.2 57.8
Shiga56.6 58.8 57.9 58.7 62.8 59.1 58.1 62.2 60.2 60.4 61.1 57.0 58.6
Kyoto57.5 60.2 61.8 62.3 60.7 61.0 61.5 60.3 62.1 61.4 61.5 58.0 60.0
Osaka62.6 62.2 62.1 63.1 61.1 60.8 59.6 61.2 59.4 57.8 57.3 56.2 57.4
Hyogo58.3 57.6 59.2 57.7 58.2 57.8 59.3 58.6 56.5 60.0 57.6 57.5 55.6
Nara67.1 61.5 61.0 61.0 61.9 60.7 60.3 59.0 59.1 60.5 54.3 59.0 58.2
Wakayama52.6 62.2 59.3 56.9 61.9 60.4 56.7 62.5 63.4 58.9 61.2 56.5 60.4
Tottori53.2 57.5 57.2 65.9 68.6 65.0 66.0 63.1 61.0 67.3 67.8 67.0 66.2
Shimane53.8 63.7 71.9 71.9 69.6 66.5 63.5 74.1 65.5 64.5 61.9 61.5 64.5
Okayama58.7 55.4 62.6 53.5 55.7 60.1 60.7 62.1 61.0 55.6 62.4 60.9 52.5
Hiroshima59.1 59.0 62.2 60.6 61.7 61.2 59.6 60.5 58.6 61.2 57.4 59.8 57.2
Yamaguchi60.1 63.5 64.6 62.5 61.5 63.5 62.4 62.2 64.5 62.2 60.9 61.3 67.2
Tokushima50.7 50.8 56.2 59.0 52.5 49.2 58.1 55.7 61.5 62.7 56.6 54.7 57.7
Kagawa60.3 61.0 59.4 64.1 56.4 62.2 54.8 58.4 59.2 61.5 58.5 60.6 64.2
Ehime58.4 57.3 59.5 59.9 62.4 55.8 56.6 57.4 60.2 56.4 62.0 59.9 56.7
Kochi68.0 70.6 63.1 63.9 63.0 67.8 68.3 70.8 66.7 57.7 68.7 56.3 74.0
Fukuoka66.5 63.6 62.1 64.3 60.9 61.9 63.3 62.4 65.1 61.1 61.9 62.4 60.0
Saga59.5 62.1 56.6 63.6 59.8 60.2 60.5 60.8 58.4 58.9 60.0 56.0 61.8
Nagasaki59.6 62.7 59.7 61.8 57.3 55.4 55.0 57.1 55.8 55.7 57.4 54.3 54.5
Kumamoto62.5 60.3 60.8 56.5 58.8 59.6 54.7 57.3 57.3 56.5 58.2 56.2 60.0
Oita62.1 59.8 59.3 63.7 54.5 56.6 57.7 54.5 56.4 61.6 60.9 60.9 63.5
Miyazaki60.3 67.7 61.6 59.6 63.7 60.8 65.2 64.8 61.8 59.5 63.8 62.5 62.1
Kagoshima59.2 60.8 67.0 62.6 63.1 63.3 63.8 66.3 64.7 64.0 73.5 65.9 66.9
Okinawa68.1 63.8 69.8 67.9 65.2 70.7 68.4 68.7 65.1 67.1 66.1 65.6 63.2
Table
Table 4. The overall low birth weight rate and the term low birth weight rate per 1000 births in 2007–2019 for each prefecture and their APCs.
Table 4. The overall low birth weight rate and the term low birth weight rate per 1000 births in 2007–2019 for each prefecture and their APCs.
Overall Low Birth Weight RateTerm Low Birth Weight Rate
PrefectureRateAPCRateAPC
Hokkaido95.1 −0.41 (−0.81, −0.01)57.7 −0.42 (−0.79, −0.04)
Aomori92.5 −0.31 (−1.09, 0.47)56.7 0.40 (−0.13, 0.93)
Iwate94.4 0.86 (0.51, 1.21)57.3 0.64 (0.02, 1.27)
Miyagi94.1 0.32 (−0.10, 0.74)55.6 0.31 (−0.19, 0.82)
Akita99.9 0.42 (−0.07, 0.91)61.4 1.17 (0.36, 1.98)
Yamagata88.1 0.47 (−0.06, 1.01)54.5 0.51 (−0.39, 1.43)
Fukushima94.0 −0.03 (−0.62, 0.55)60.0 0.29 (−0.47, 1.06)
Ibaraki95.1 −0.04 (−0.39, 0.32)60.9 0.22 (−0.12, 0.56)
Tochigi104.1 0.16 (−0.21, 0.53)65.2 0.59 (0.09, 1.08)
Gunma95.1 0.03 (−0.39, 0.44)61.0 −0.15 (−0.69, 0.39)
Saitama94.4 −0.07 (−0.26, 0.12)59.5 −0.18 (−0.41, 0.05)
Chiba91.3 −0.17 (−0.43, 0.09)57.6 −0.12 (−0.43, 0.20)
Tokyo93.1 −0.38 (−0.53, −0.22)59.5 −0.33 (−0.50, −0.15)
Kanagawa95.4 −0.23 (−0.39, −0.07)61.4 −0.52 (−0.81, −0.22)
Niigata91.0 0.33 (−0.19, 0.85)55.9 0.42 (−0.30, 1.14)
Toyama89.8 −0.41 (−1.40, 0.59)55.8 0.36 (−0.83, 1.56)
Ishikawa87.8 0.67 (−0.06, 1.41)54.2 0.70 (−0.30, 1.71)
Fukui86.4 −0.21 (−0.82, 0.41)53.4 1.04 (0.31, 1.79)
Yamanashi104.1 −0.44 (−1.23, 0.37)68.0 −0.54 (−1.77, 0.70)
Nagano95.5 −0.39 (−0.81, 0.03)63.1 0.25 (−0.28, 0.77)
Gifu92.8 0.06 (−0.46, 0.58)57.5 −0.02 (−0.74, 0.70)
Shizuoka101.0 −0.42 (−0.57, −0.27)64.9 −0.55 (−0.94, −0.16)
Aichi97.3 −0.07 (−0.29, 0.15)61.7 −0.32 (−0.58, −0.07)
Mie91.3 0.21 (−0.24, 0.66)55.3 −0.12 (−0.91, 0.69)
Shiga94.1 −0.25 (−0.67, 0.17)59.4 0.18 (−0.35, 0.71)
Kyoto97.1 −0.49 (−0.64, −0.34)60.6 0.03 (−0.39, 0.45)
Osaka94.5 −0.70 (−0.92, −0.48)60.2 −0.91 (−1.15, −0.67)
Hyogo95.5 −0.43 (−0.66, −0.20)58.0 −0.18 (−0.50, 0.14)
Nara92.7 −0.63 (−1.15, −0.10)60.4 −0.91 (−1.42, −0.40)
Wakayama94.5 −0.25 (−0.86, 0.36)59.4 0.36 (−0.50, 1.23)
Tottori96.8 1.15 (0.57, 1.72)63.4 1.41 (0.43, 2.41)
Shimane101.9 0.26 (−0.82, 1.36)65.6 −0.01 (−1.43, 1.42)
Okayama89.1 −0.28 (−1.00, 0.44)58.5 0.06 (−0.98, 1.12)
Hiroshima96.2 −0.01 (−0.32, 0.29)59.9 −0.29 (−0.69, 0.11)
Yamaguchi96.9 −0.36 (−0.82, 0.11)62.8 0.17 (−0.32, 0.67)
Tokushima90.9 0.29 (−0.79, 1.39)55.7 0.99 (−0.10, 2.11)
Kagawa89.7 −0.06 (−0.68, 0.57)60.0 0.11 (−0.66, 0.88)
Ehime90.6 −0.14 (−0.68, 0.40)58.7 −0.01 (−0.63, 0.62)
Kochi105.7 −0.57 (−1.55, 0.43)66.1 −0.24 (−1.57, 1.11)
Fukuoka99.1 −0.59 (−0.79, −0.39)62.8 −0.41 (−0.81, −0.01)
Saga93.7 −0.21 (−0.75, 0.34)59.9 −0.18 (−0.77, 0.42)
Nagasaki91.7 −0.24 (−0.86, 0.38)57.5 −0.95 (−1.44, −0.46)
Kumamoto93.8 −0.77 (−1.27, −0.27)58.4 −0.48 (−1.03, 0.08)
Oita93.1 0.55 (−0.05, 1.16)59.3 0.14 (−0.77, 1.06)
Miyazaki103.1 −0.37 (−0.72, −0.02)62.6 −0.04 (−0.69, 0.61)
Kagoshima105.7 0.50 (−0.02, 1.03)64.5 0.92 (0.24, 1.60)
Okinawa112.2 −0.23 (−0.69, 0.24)66.9 −0.32 (−0.86, 0.22)
APC, annual percent change.
Table
Table 5. Median (Q1–Q3) for each characteristic in the prefectures used in the analysis.
Table 5. Median (Q1–Q3) for each characteristic in the prefectures used in the analysis.
VariableMedian (Q1–Q3)
Proportion of multiple births (%)1.9 (1.8–2.1)
Proportion of live births from mothers aged under 20 years (%) 1.2 (1.0–1.4)
Proportion of live births from mothers aged 40 years or more (%)4.7 (4.4–5.3)
Number of hospitals per 100,000 persons7.1 (5.9–10.0)
Number of clinics per 100,000 persons81.1 (72.3–89.6)
Number of hospitals with an obstetrics department per 100,000 persons;1.3 (1.0–1.5)
Total population1,642,589 (1,102,517–2,826,000)
Population density (population per hectare)8.2 (6.2–12.3)
Taxable income per capita (1000 yen)1287.1 (1141.3–1401.9)
Proportion of female high school graduates going to a higher educational institution53.9 (49.3–57.6)
Proportion of live births from unemployed households1.6 (1.3–2.1)
Proportion of obese women (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2) (%) *17.7 (16.0–19.8)
Proportion of lean women (BMI < 18.5 kg/m2) (%)12.8 (11.7–13.9)
BMI, body mass index; * In Japan, BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 is generally classified as obesity.
Table
Table 6. Results of the regression analysis (N = 282).
Table 6. Results of the regression analysis (N = 282).
VariableOverall Low Birth Weight RateTerm Low Birth Weight Rate
SPRC (95% CI)p-ValueSPRC (95% CI)p-Value
Year−0.021 0.004 −0.029 0.001
(−0.034, −0.008) (−0.045, −0.012)
Proportion of multiple births (%)0.016 <0.0010.011 <0.001
(0.012, 0.021) (0.005, 0.018)
Proportion of live births from mothers aged under 20 years (%) 0.001 0.926 0.000 0.945
(−0.010, 0.011) (−0.012, 0.016)
Proportion of live births from mothers aged 40 years or more (%)0.010 0.087 0.026 <0.001
(−0.001, 0.022) (0.011, 0.040)
Number of hospitals per 100,000 persons−0.008 0.374 −0.002 0.862
(−0.023, 0.008) (−0.020, 0.017)
Number of clinics per 100,000 persons0.008 0.381 0.008 0.458
(−0.009, 0.025) (−0.012, 0.029)
Number of hospitals with an obstetrics department per 100,000 persons;−0.007 0.334 −0.015 0.114
(−0.021, 0.007) (−0.031, 0.003)
Total population0.007 0.714 −0.005 0.823
(−0.026, 0.040) (−0.044, 0.035)
Population density (population per hectare)−0.003 0.875 0.004 0.867
(−0.036, 0.030) (−0.036, 0.042)
Taxable income per capita (1000 yen)−0.016 0.303 −0.027 0.167
(−0.045, 0.014) (−0.061, 0.010)
Proportion of female high school graduates going to a higher educational institution−0.003 0.729 −0.002 0.881
(−0.021, 0.014) (−0.023, 0.020)
Proportion of live births from unemployed households0.005 0.466 −0.006 0.475
(−0.008, 0.017) (−0.021, 0.010)
Proportion of obese women (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2) (%) *0.053 <0.0010.071 <0.001
(0.028, 0.079) (0.039, 0.103)
Proportion of lean women (BMI < 18.5 kg/m2) (%)0.027 0.008 0.058 <0.001
(0.008, 0.047) (0.032, 0.082)
SPRC, standardized partial regression coefficient; CI, confidence intervals; BMI, body mass index. * In Japan, BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 is generally classified as obesity.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Okui, T.; Nakashima, N. Differences in Rates of Low Birth Weight among Prefectures in Japan: An Ecological Study Using Government Statistics Data. Children 2022, 9, 305. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9030305

AMA Style

Okui T, Nakashima N. Differences in Rates of Low Birth Weight among Prefectures in Japan: An Ecological Study Using Government Statistics Data. Children. 2022; 9(3):305. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9030305

Chicago/Turabian Style

Okui, Tasuku, and Naoki Nakashima. 2022. "Differences in Rates of Low Birth Weight among Prefectures in Japan: An Ecological Study Using Government Statistics Data" Children 9, no. 3: 305. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9030305

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop