AMR vs Costa Rica: Hypertension: effective treatment coverage (controlled hypertension)
AMR
37.3%
in 2019
Costa Rica
50.3%
in 2019
AMR rank
2nd
Costa Rica rank
4th
Hypertension: effective treatment coverage (controlled hypertension) over time
- AMR
- Costa Rica
How they compare
Costa Rica currently reports 50.3% against 37.3% in AMR, a difference of 13.0%.
That makes Costa Rica's figure about 1.3 times AMR's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 30 shared years of data; in 1990 it was AMR ahead.
AMR ranks 2nd and Costa Rica ranks 4th of 17 groups.
Across the 3 decades both report, AMR averaged higher in 2 and Costa Rica in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | AMR | Costa Rica | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 17.6% | 11.4% | 6.1% | AMR |
| 2000s | 27.4% | 21.0% | 6.4% | AMR |
| 2010s | 35.8% | 41.2% | 5.4% | Costa Rica |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher hypertension: effective treatment coverage (controlled hypertension), AMR or Costa Rica?
- Costa Rica, at 50.3% against 37.3% in AMR as of 2019.
- What is the difference in hypertension: effective treatment coverage (controlled hypertension) between AMR and Costa Rica?
- 13.0%, with Costa Rica ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for AMR and Costa Rica?
- 30 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2019.
- How do AMR and Costa Rica rank globally for hypertension: effective treatment coverage (controlled hypertension)?
- AMR ranks 2nd and Costa Rica ranks 4th of 17 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- World Health Organization, Global Health Observatory, published as Hypertension: effective treatment coverage (controlled hypertension) among adults aged 30-79 with hypertension, crude (%). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.