placestats

Anaemia in women vs. Vulnerable employment

Holds up after adjusting for income

Across 172 countries, Anaemia in women and Vulnerable employment rise and fall together at r = +0.66 (on a scale from −1 to +1, where 0 means no link). Comparing only countries with similar income (GDP per person) shrinks it to +0.23 (q = 0.045, allowing for the many pairs tested). Much of the first figure is that both measures rise with national income, but a weak positive link remains.

Comparing countries across the middle half of anaemia in women, 19.3% to 34.5% of women aged 15-49, vulnerable employment is worse by 23.4% of employment at the top of that range than the bottom. Comparing only countries with similar national income, the gap is 5.9% of employment.

Link before adjusting (r)+0.655p = 1.7e-22 · 172 countries
After adjusting for national income+0.233p = 0.002 · likely range [+0.09, +0.37]
p, allowing for regions0.004standard error 0.052 · 7 regions
Check for luck (q)0.045across 12,497 pairs

How to read these.r runs from −1 (one goes up as the other goes down) to +1 (they rise together), and 0 means no link. Adjusting for national income means comparing countries with the same GDP per person, so differences in wealth can’t explain the link. Income is used in percentage terms, since an extra $1,000 means more to a poor country than to a rich one. p is how likely a link this strong would be if there were really none. Below 0.05 means it is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 1.1e-32 means a decimal point followed by 31 zeros and then 11, so very close to zero. The likely range is where the true figure probably lies, and a range that crosses zero means the link could easily be chance. Countries in the same region tend to resemble each other, so the third figure allows for that, which gives a fairer p. The standard error is the typical size of the error in r. Finally, testing this many pairs means some will look strong by luck alone. A q below 0.05 means this link is unlikely to be one of those.

Anaemia in women · % of women aged 15-49link with income -0.67 · high
Vulnerable employment · % of employmentlink with income -0.87 · proxy

Both of these rise and fall closely with national income, so a strong link between them before adjusting was close to certain. Read the adjusted figure, not the first one.

“Link with income” is how closely each measure tracks GDP per person across countries, from −1 to +1.

Every country as a dot

Anaemia in women · % of women aged 15-49 →Vulnerable employment · % of employment →10.5%59.9%0.456%90.2%Afghanistan: 45.4% of women aged 15-49, 81.8% of employmentAngola: 43.8% of women aged 15-49, 66.3% of employmentAlbania: 24.7% of women aged 15-49, 46% of employmentUnited Arab Emirates: 28.2% of women aged 15-49, 1.5% of employmentArgentina: 23.5% of women aged 15-49, 22.3% of employmentArmenia: 18.7% of women aged 15-49, 32.8% of employmentAustralia: 11.1% of women aged 15-49, 9.12% of employmentAustria: 16.7% of women aged 15-49, 7.85% of employmentAzerbaijan: 35.6% of women aged 15-49, 53.8% of employmentBurundi: 39% of women aged 15-49, 83.7% of employmentBelgium: 15% of women aged 15-49, 11% of employmentBenin: 50% of women aged 15-49, 78.5% of employmentBurkina Faso: 44.3% of women aged 15-49, 80.6% of employmentBangladesh: 37.6% of women aged 15-49, 57.3% of employmentBulgaria: 25.8% of women aged 15-49, 6.92% of employmentBahrain: 38.4% of women aged 15-49, 0.749% of employmentBahamas, The: 18.8% of women aged 15-49, 15.9% of employmentBosnia and Herzegovina: 26% of women aged 15-49, 18.1% of employmentBelarus: 22.1% of women aged 15-49, 6.33% of employmentBelize: 21.3% of women aged 15-49, 29.8% of employmentBolivia: 24.9% of women aged 15-49, 62.7% of employmentBrazil: 21.3% of women aged 15-49, 26.1% of employmentBarbados: 20.1% of women aged 15-49, 18.8% of employmentBrunei Darussalam: 18.3% of women aged 15-49, 4.48% of employmentBhutan: 33.8% of women aged 15-49, 69% of employmentBotswana: 30.9% of women aged 15-49, 25.6% of employmentCentral African Republic: 43.4% of women aged 15-49, 79.4% of employmentCanada: 14% of women aged 15-49, 9.56% of employmentSwitzerland: 16.6% of women aged 15-49, 9.6% of employmentChile: 15.7% of women aged 15-49, 20.9% of employmentChina: 15.6% of women aged 15-49, 33.4% of employmentCote d'Ivoire: 51.4% of women aged 15-49, 69.4% of employmentCameroon: 38.9% of women aged 15-49, 67.6% of employmentCongo, Dem. Rep.: 40% of women aged 15-49, 81.5% of employmentCongo, Rep.: 46.7% of women aged 15-49, 75.9% of employmentColombia: 22.4% of women aged 15-49, 43% of employmentComoros: 29.9% of women aged 15-49, 56.8% of employmentCabo Verde: 40.6% of women aged 15-49, 34.3% of employmentCosta Rica: 13.7% of women aged 15-49, 23.4% of employmentCyprus: 16.4% of women aged 15-49, 8.38% of employmentCzechia: 24.6% of women aged 15-49, 13.5% of employmentGermany: 14% of women aged 15-49, 4.34% of employmentDjibouti: 31.8% of women aged 15-49, 30.3% of employmentDenmark: 17% of women aged 15-49, 5.4% of employmentDominican Republic: 22.4% of women aged 15-49, 38% of employmentAlgeria: 31.6% of women aged 15-49, 25.6% of employmentEcuador: 20.2% of women aged 15-49, 50.1% of employmentEgypt, Arab Rep.: 32.7% of women aged 15-49, 23.9% of employmentSpain: 15.6% of women aged 15-49, 10.1% of employmentEstonia: 24.7% of women aged 15-49, 7.09% of employmentEthiopia: 23.1% of women aged 15-49, 84.1% of employmentFinland: 13.6% of women aged 15-49, 9.46% of employmentFiji: 29.9% of women aged 15-49, 32.8% of employmentFrance: 13.1% of women aged 15-49, 8.5% of employmentGabon: 59.9% of women aged 15-49, 29.8% of employmentUnited Kingdom: 13.6% of women aged 15-49, 11.5% of employmentGeorgia: 30.2% of women aged 15-49, 42.4% of employmentGhana: 36% of women aged 15-49, 60% of employmentGuinea: 45.7% of women aged 15-49, 79.2% of employmentGambia, The: 46.1% of women aged 15-49, 63.5% of employmentGuinea-Bissau: 45.7% of women aged 15-49, 74.9% of employmentEquatorial Guinea: 41.3% of women aged 15-49, 23.1% of employmentGreece: 15.6% of women aged 15-49, 23.1% of employmentGuatemala: 10.5% of women aged 15-49, 36.2% of employmentGuyana: 37.5% of women aged 15-49, 25.3% of employmentHonduras: 18.8% of women aged 15-49, 33.9% of employmentCroatia: 23.3% of women aged 15-49, 6.35% of employmentHaiti: 45.9% of women aged 15-49, 76% of employmentHungary: 24.1% of women aged 15-49, 7.83% of employmentIndonesia: 26.7% of women aged 15-49, 50% of employmentIndia: 53.7% of women aged 15-49, 71.6% of employmentIreland: 14% of women aged 15-49, 9.64% of employmentIran, Islamic Rep.: 25.5% of women aged 15-49, 39.5% of employmentIraq: 27.1% of women aged 15-49, 27.1% of employmentIceland: 14.7% of women aged 15-49, 8.4% of employmentIsrael: 14.6% of women aged 15-49, 7.7% of employmentItaly: 16.4% of women aged 15-49, 14.3% of employmentJamaica: 21.5% of women aged 15-49, 31.6% of employmentJordan: 33% of women aged 15-49, 7.86% of employmentJapan: 18.7% of women aged 15-49, 7.49% of employmentKazakhstan: 30.5% of women aged 15-49, 24.8% of employmentKenya: 32.2% of women aged 15-49, 63.8% of employmentKyrgyz Republic: 32.9% of women aged 15-49, 29% of employmentCambodia: 38% of women aged 15-49, 52.3% of employmentKorea, Rep.: 15.7% of women aged 15-49, 17.7% of employmentKuwait: 27.7% of women aged 15-49, 2.4% of employmentLao PDR: 28.6% of women aged 15-49, 76.4% of employmentLebanon: 34% of women aged 15-49, 19.4% of employmentLiberia: 42.5% of women aged 15-49, 76.9% of employmentLibya: 29.3% of women aged 15-49, 21.6% of employmentSt. Lucia: 19.9% of women aged 15-49, 22% of employmentSri Lanka: 20.9% of women aged 15-49, 39.2% of employmentLesotho: 34.2% of women aged 15-49, 32.6% of employmentLithuania: 23.7% of women aged 15-49, 10.4% of employmentLuxembourg: 15.4% of women aged 15-49, 6.95% of employmentLatvia: 21.4% of women aged 15-49, 8.62% of employmentMorocco: 29.5% of women aged 15-49, 35.5% of employmentMoldova: 28.5% of women aged 15-49, 58.6% of employmentMadagascar: 37.2% of women aged 15-49, 84.4% of employmentMaldives: 43.4% of women aged 15-49, 16.9% of employmentMexico: 13.2% of women aged 15-49, 25.3% of employmentNorth Macedonia: 21.5% of women aged 15-49, 12.3% of employmentMali: 56.5% of women aged 15-49, 75.8% of employmentMalta: 15.7% of women aged 15-49, 10.1% of employmentMyanmar: 39.7% of women aged 15-49, 62.9% of employmentMontenegro: 25.8% of women aged 15-49, 14.3% of employmentMongolia: 19.1% of women aged 15-49, 38.4% of employmentMozambique: 47% of women aged 15-49, 83.7% of employmentMauritania: 54.5% of women aged 15-49, 53.3% of employmentMauritius: 32.8% of women aged 15-49, 14.9% of employmentMalawi: 32.4% of women aged 15-49, 59.9% of employmentMalaysia: 31.3% of women aged 15-49, 21.9% of employmentNamibia: 24.9% of women aged 15-49, 29.9% of employmentNiger: 47.1% of women aged 15-49, 83.7% of employmentNigeria: 37.9% of women aged 15-49, 66.5% of employmentNetherlands: 16.5% of women aged 15-49, 13.4% of employmentNorway: 16.3% of women aged 15-49, 4.17% of employmentNepal: 33.2% of women aged 15-49, 77% of employmentNew Zealand: 12.4% of women aged 15-49, 12.6% of employmentOman: 34.4% of women aged 15-49, 3.81% of employmentPakistan: 46.5% of women aged 15-49, 55.5% of employmentPanama: 25.5% of women aged 15-49, 37.9% of employmentPeru: 21% of women aged 15-49, 47.5% of employmentPhilippines: 12% of women aged 15-49, 33.6% of employmentPapua New Guinea: 28.8% of women aged 15-49, 71.2% of employmentPoland: 23.4% of women aged 15-49, 15% of employmentPortugal: 15% of women aged 15-49, 9.66% of employmentParaguay: 23.2% of women aged 15-49, 36.1% of employmentWest Bank and Gaza: 24.8% of women aged 15-49, 18.4% of employmentQatar: 23.6% of women aged 15-49, 0.456% of employmentRomania: 24.3% of women aged 15-49, 13% of employmentRussian Federation: 24.1% of women aged 15-49, 4.93% of employmentRwanda: 16.1% of women aged 15-49, 39.4% of employmentSaudi Arabia: 17.6% of women aged 15-49, 1.66% of employmentSudan: 34% of women aged 15-49, 39.7% of employmentSenegal: 43.1% of women aged 15-49, 63% of employmentSingapore: 16.6% of women aged 15-49, 9.3% of employmentSolomon Islands: 32.6% of women aged 15-49, 68.7% of employmentSierra Leone: 44.6% of women aged 15-49, 86% of employmentEl Salvador: 14.4% of women aged 15-49, 30.8% of employmentSomalia, Fed. Rep.: 46.2% of women aged 15-49, 46% of employmentSerbia: 24.9% of women aged 15-49, 23.9% of employmentSao Tome and Principe: 39.7% of women aged 15-49, 35% of employmentSuriname: 22.2% of women aged 15-49, 18.4% of employmentSlovak Republic: 25.3% of women aged 15-49, 11.8% of employmentSlovenia: 25.7% of women aged 15-49, 10.6% of employmentSweden: 16.8% of women aged 15-49, 6.87% of employmentEswatini: 28.3% of women aged 15-49, 28.4% of employmentSyrian Arab Republic: 31% of women aged 15-49, 38.9% of employmentChad: 46.5% of women aged 15-49, 90.2% of employmentTogo: 41.5% of women aged 15-49, 75% of employmentThailand: 20.7% of women aged 15-49, 48% of employmentTajikistan: 37.3% of women aged 15-49, 28% of employmentTurkmenistan: 34.8% of women aged 15-49, 28.3% of employmentTimor-Leste: 29.7% of women aged 15-49, 58.6% of employmentTonga: 20.7% of women aged 15-49, 33.7% of employmentTrinidad and Tobago: 22.1% of women aged 15-49, 21.2% of employmentTunisia: 27.7% of women aged 15-49, 17.9% of employmentTurkiye: 29.3% of women aged 15-49, 23.9% of employmentTanzania: 38.8% of women aged 15-49, 83.7% of employmentUganda: 27.2% of women aged 15-49, 74.4% of employmentUkraine: 19.4% of women aged 15-49, 19% of employmentUruguay: 24.5% of women aged 15-49, 24.4% of employmentUnited States: 15% of women aged 15-49, 3.81% of employmentUzbekistan: 30.4% of women aged 15-49, 33.3% of employmentSt. Vincent and the Grenadines: 18.8% of women aged 15-49, 22% of employmentViet Nam: 20.5% of women aged 15-49, 51.4% of employmentVanuatu: 30.4% of women aged 15-49, 58% of employmentSamoa: 21.9% of women aged 15-49, 41.6% of employmentSouth Africa: 31.2% of women aged 15-49, 11.7% of employmentZambia: 27.1% of women aged 15-49, 70.2% of employmentZimbabwe: 27.5% of women aged 15-49, 68.2% of employmentAUSBHRDEUETHGABGTMINDMDVMLITCDUGAUSA

best-fit line line after adjusting

Four ways to measure the link

MethodrpCountries
Standard (Pearson), not adjusted+0.6551.7e-22172
By rank (Spearman), not adjusted+0.6172.0e-19172
Standard (Pearson), adjusted for national income+0.2330.002172
By rank (Spearman), adjusted for national income+0.0780.311172

The rank version uses only each country’s place in line, from lowest to highest, so a few extreme countries count for less. The adjusted and unadjusted versions use the same 172 countries: those that report both measures and GDP per person. So the gap between them comes from the adjustment, not from a change in which countries are counted. Drop in the size of r after adjusting: +0.422 (a minus sign means it grew).

How solid is it?

Leaving out one country at a time, r ranges from +0.206 (without IND) to +0.252 (without ETH). The bar above shows that range on a scale from −1 to +1, with the solid line at the full result. The single country that moves r most: IND (-0.028).

Within each region

Countries are not separate, unrelated cases, and neighbors share a lot. A link that holds inside each region is far more believable than one that shows up only when comparing regions.

nr
East Asia & Pacific23+0.27
Europe & Central Asia48+0.26
Latin America & Caribbean26+0.54
Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan & Pakistan22+0.26
Sub-Saharan Africa45+0.32

By income third

If the link shows up only in the richest third of countries, it is a feature of rich countries, not a general pattern.

nr
Poorest third58+0.42
Middle third57+0.05
Richest third57+0.06

By largest religious group

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
Christians103+0.25
Muslims49+0.45

By last european coloniser

Countries grouped by a label they share, such as main religion, rather than by a number. Groups of fewer than twelve countries are not shown. These groups differ in income, region and history all at once. So a gap between them is a place to start asking questions, not an answer.

nr
France25+0.29
Never a European colony21-0.21
Spain18+0.06
United Kingdom55+0.26

Without outliers (countries far outside the middle half of countries on either measure, by more than one and a half times the width of that middle half): r = +0.248 after dropping 1 countries.

Two series, one country

Both measures over the years for one country you pick. The two charts are stacked so they share only the years along the bottom.

Loading…

Over time, within countries

Everything above compares countries with each other at one moment. This section compares each country only with itself over 24years. So a link here can’t come from anything about a country that stays the same, such as its history, geography, institutions or culture.

Within countries over time, there is no link that is clearly more than chance (r = +0.076, comparing each country only with itself over the years, and each year only with the same year elsewhere). Whatever the cross-country picture shows, countries whose anaemia in women moved did not tend to see their vulnerable employment move with it.

Across countries (adjusted)+0.233for comparison
Within countries+0.216each country vs itself
…and vs the same year elsewhere+0.076q = 0.371 · 178 countries
Year-on-year changes+0.025q = 0.499
Read with care.
  • Almost all of this indicator's variation is between countries, not within them, so the within-country estimate rests on a small part of the data.

4,268 country-years (one country in one year), 178 countries, 2000–2023, about 24 years each on average. Share of the variation that happens within countries over time: 3% for Anaemia in women, 1% for Vulnerable employment. The margins of error allow for each country appearing many times, and for each year’s value being close to the year before.

Year-to-year changes are a cautious test, not a final answer. Looking only at changes from one year to the next removes each country’s own trends. But it also makes measurement mistakes louder, which pulls the results toward zero. A near-zero result here is weak evidence of no link, not proof.

With one measure years behind the other

0.20−0.2-100+10years Vulnerable employment trails Anaemia in women →lag -10: r = 0.089 (n = 4,094)lag -9: r = 0.086 (n = 4,272)lag -8: r = 0.092 (n = 4,272)lag -7: r = 0.094 (n = 4,272)lag -6: r = 0.095 (n = 4,272)lag -5: r = 0.098 (n = 4,272)lag -4: r = 0.101 (n = 4,272)lag -3: r = 0.095 (n = 4,272)lag -2: r = 0.089 (n = 4,272)lag -1: r = 0.083 (n = 4,271)lag +0: r = 0.076 (n = 4,268)lag +1: r = 0.068 (n = 4,263)lag +2: r = 0.063 (n = 4,258)lag +3: r = 0.048 (n = 4,080)lag +4: r = 0.031 (n = 3,902)lag +5: r = 0.011 (n = 3,724)lag +6: r = -0.010 (n = 3,546)lag +7: r = -0.032 (n = 3,368)lag +8: r = -0.051 (n = 3,190)lag +9: r = -0.070 (n = 3,012)lag +10: r = -0.092 (n = 2,834)

Same year (lag 0): +0.076. A peak away from zero does not show which comes first. These series change slowly — this year’s value is close to last year’s. That makes the curve smooth and nearly symmetric, whatever produced the data. Even a sharp peak at one lag (a gap of some years) would not prove that one measure changes the other.

The data


% of women aged 15-49
% of employment		Years
Gabon GAB59.9%29.8%2023, 2025
Mali MLI56.5%75.8%2023, 2025
Mauritania MRT54.5%53.3%2023, 2025
India IND53.7%71.6%2023, 2025
Cote d'Ivoire CIV51.4%69.4%2023, 2025
Benin BEN50%78.5%2023, 2025
Niger NER47.1%83.7%2023, 2025
Mozambique MOZ47%83.7%2023, 2025
Congo, Rep. COG46.7%75.9%2023, 2025
Chad TCD46.5%90.2%2023, 2025
Pakistan PAK46.5%55.5%2023, 2025
Somalia, Fed. Rep. SOM46.2%46%2023, 2025
Gambia, The GMB46.1%63.5%2023, 2025
Haiti HTI45.9%76%2023, 2025
Guinea-Bissau GNB45.7%74.9%2023, 2025

World Bank, World Development Indicators
World Bank, World Development Indicators

Sources

Anaemia in women

Prevalence of anaemia among women of reproductive age (% of women ages 15-49)

World Health Organization · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly

Vulnerable employment

Vulnerable employment, total (% of total employment)

International Labour Organization · CC BY 4.0 · updated quarterly

Self-employed workers and unpaid family workers, who have no employer and usually no protection. The ILO estimates it with a model for every country and year, which is why it is complete where surveys are not.

How this was computed

Data used: most recent value in 2010-2025; values come from 2021–2025. To adjust for income, each measure is first predicted from GDP per person (in percentage terms, on a log scale) with a straight-line fit. Only what is left over is then compared. This is called a partial correlation. The line is drawn the standard way (ordinary least squares), which picks the line that comes closest to all the countries at once. The error margins allow for countries in the same region resembling each other, using 7 World Bank regions. The q-value corrects for testing all 12,497 pairs at once, using the Benjamini–Hochberg method. Underlying data last updated DYB 2024. How the country data works · explore Anaemia in women and Vulnerable employment

This page shows that two measures go together. It does not show that Anaemia in women changes Vulnerable employment, or the reverse. These figures also describe countries, not individual people. See the ecological fallacy.

More links with Anaemia in women or Vulnerable employment